The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions

[inhumility]

The advent of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was an epoch making event towards the end of the nineteenth century in the history of comparative religions in the present era.
Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, The Guided One (1835-1908), made it convenient for the human beings be of any race, color or creed to make comparative study of the Revealed Religions of the world and to accept the truth wherever one finds it. He set out many unbiased, neutral and full of wisdom principles for that purpose, the foremost among these is “The claim of a Religion on any topic as well as the logical argumentation should be from its Revealed Book”.
There may be a religion whose followers claim (e.g. Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism, Zoroastrianism or any other religion) that their religion or its teachings are for the whole world. ( i.e. it is international ), but the others may demand the followers of that religion to prove if this claim is explicitly mentioned in your Revealed Book and that if that claim has been supported by divine arguments in your Revealed Book.
This could be easily checked by anyone sincerely searching for the truth or guidance. If a religion on any of the important topics or human problems does not contain the relevant claim or argumentation / reasoning then that religion could be pronounced as a Dead Religion for all practical purposes. (One may remember here that all revealed religions in its origin were truthful; this fact has been highlighted by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad many a times and with great emphases)
We are more concerned with the present era – a dynamic scientific era; where we live in. The humanity is facing very complex problems which must be addressed by the Living Religion of the world if there is any utility in the religion worth the name; any denomination. The religion is for the common as also for the highly literate and since it is claimed to be divine, it should satisfy the common man as also the very literate special man.
The followers of a religion might be very clever and cunning that they could advocate for their religion and could attribute claims to a religion which re not explicitly found in its Revealed Book or they could provide arguments in its favor which are only man-made and not provided by the Divine.
In that case such a religion could be pronounced on its merit, at the most, to be a man-made religion, definitely not sent by God. This could be a litmus test. Verify your religion of your choice on these two simple but wise counts; you might be stunned to realize that many a religion are just myths and its followers are following it only blindfolded.
On his own part Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad set out this epoch making principle in an Inter-Religions Conference in the year 1896 and then he proved that the religion of his choice has claim and arguments on the five basic questions facing by humanity:-

• The Physical, Moral, and Spiritual States of Man.
• What is the State of Man After Death?
• The Object of Man's Life and the Means of its Attainment.
• The Operation of the Practical Ordinances of the Law in This Life and the Next.
• Sources of Divine Knowledge.

The conference had given these questions on which the participant speakers had to speak.
I leave the solutions to the respected members. Try for the Religion of your choice. Best of luck!

 

[lunamoth]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

1. The Physical, Moral, and Spiritual States of Man.

2. What is the State of Man After Death

3. The Object of Man's Life and the Means of its Attainment.

4. The Operation of the Practical Ordinances of the Law in This Life and the Next.

5. Sources of Divine Knowledge.

The conference had given these questions on which the participant speakers had to speak. I leave the solutions to the respected members. Try for the Religion of your choice. Best of luck!

1. Physical, moral and spiritual states are fused. Morality is a lower order consideration than a spirituality directed toward God.

2. Reunion with God and loved ones.

3. To know and worship God through prayer and worship to God, Scripture and sacraments from God, loving-kindness and service to humanity.

4. Love God and love one another.

5. Scripture, tradition and reason.



peace,
lunamoth

 

[Mick]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

Luna Moth,

I believe the original theme of this posting is that you should be able to find references in your Revealed Books. The poster stated that adherents may make claims, but without support from your Revealed Book, at most, it would be a Man-Made Religion.

I am not suggesting that the Christian Religion is Man-Made, but the exercise was not to state your opinion or belief, but to answer the five questions with support from your Bible.

I am going to do the same for the Baha'i Faith. It should be interesting, but also time consuming. Hopefully, some other Baha'i will jump in first, and save me the time.

Mick

 

[Thomas]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

From a Catholic perspective:
The Physical, Moral, and Spiritual States of Man.
"In him we live and move and have our being"
(Acts 17:28)
Which really answers the following questions, but ...

What is the State of Man After Death?
"In him we live and move and have our being"
(Acts 17:28) or:

"According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love"
Ephesians 1:4

The Object of Man's Life and the Means of its Attainment.
"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name"
John 1:12

The Operation of the Practical Ordinances of the Law in This Life and the Next.
"Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Matthew 18:18

Sources of Divine Knowledge.
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."
John 4:16

Apologies to Lunamoth for butting in...

Thomas

 

[lunamoth]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

Hi Mick, I look forward to reading your post on this. You might want to note, however, that the 'challenge' above was conceived by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, whose claim to be the Messiah is rejected by Baha'is. Thus, I'm not sure how definative this kind of comparison really will be.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (مرزا غلام احمد) (February 13, 1835–May 26, 1908), a highly controversial religious figure belonging to India, was the founder of the Ahmadiyya religious movement. He claimed to be the “Second Coming of Christ”, the promised Messiah, the Mahdi as well as the being the Mujaddid of the 14th. Islamic century[1]. He remains a highly controversial and reviled figure[2][3] among most Muslims who consider him to be an apostate[4]. Among his followers as well, who revere him and call themselves “Ahmadi Muslims”, the interpretation of his claims is controversial.

(Wiki: Mirza Ghulam Ahmad)

peace,
lunamoth

 

[lunamoth]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

From a Catholic perspective:
The Physical, Moral, and Spiritual States of Man.
"In him we live and move and have our being"
(Acts 17:28)
Which really answers the following questions, but ...

What is the State of Man After Death?
"In him we live and move and have our being"
(Acts 17:28) or:

"According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love"
Ephesians 1:4

The Object of Man's Life and the Means of its Attainment.
"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name"
John 1:12

The Operation of the Practical Ordinances of the Law in This Life and the Next.
"Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Matthew 18:18

Sources of Divine Knowledge.
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."
John 4:16

Apologies to Lunamoth for butting in...

Thomas

Very nice Thomas--much better than I would have done.

peace,
lunamoth

 

[taijasi]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

I could answer all of these questions in a different way, but I find that Thomas' answers reflect my thinking almost precisely. Nevermind that we might explain the passages slightly differently, most of them leave little room for doubt or question.

The only caveat I have is that I think Divine Knowledge comes to us in several ways, and neither Jesus of Nazareth, nor the Person of the Christ, is responsible as such for all of these:

1. Foremost, one's own Highest Spirit, or the Soul/Buddhi/"Christ" within (Intuition), or the action/activity of the Divine Mind (`Holy Spirit') - aka, the Inner Light
2. Through those accomplished Souls who have gone before - some of Whom have even remained, and are with us to this day. This method of knowing refers to association with the Elder Brothers, in some form or fashion, and is more direct than the 3rd method, although ultimately it falls back on method #1, as do all ways of Knowing.
3. Through the revealed Teachings and writings, aka Holy Scriptures, of the Elder Brothers, from #2. These surely number in the hundreds, in terms of published and freely available written works - and that is not counting the existing World Religious Scriptures, which easily trebles or quadruples that number.
4. Many inferior forms of Knowledge exist, all dependent upon the (lower, personal, mortal) mind for confirmation - although some are largely emotive, or even of a sensory nature, in their origin. As already mentioned, these must ultimately be confirmed by the modus operandi of #1 ... in order for accuracy & validity to be confirmed.

A short attempt to document each of these sources for Divine Knowledge might include the following references:

1. Atma-buddhi-manas (Sanskrit) [from atman self + buddhi spiritual soul + manas mind] "The 'Three-tongued flame' that never dies is the immortal spiritual triad -- the Atma-Buddhi and Manas -- the fruition of the latter assimilated by the first two after every terrestrial life.
   
   " 'I am the three-wicked Flame and my wicks are immortal,' says the defunct. 'I enter into the domain of Sekhem (the God whose arm sows the seed of action produced by the disembodied soul) and I enter the region of the Flames who have destroyed their adversaries,' i.e., got rid of the sin-creating 'four wicks' " (The Secret Doctrine 1:237, in reference to chap. i., vii., "The Egyptian Book of the Dead," and the "Mysteries of Ro-stan."). [The "four wicks" are terrestrial mind, the passions, the vital body or nephesh, and prana, or vitality itself]
   
   Atmabodha (Sanskrit) [from atman self + bodha wisdom] Wisdom of self; knowledge or wisdom of the hierarch or highest portion of any being.
2. Mahatma (Sanskrit) [from maha great + atman self] Great soul or self; relatively perfected human beings, also called teachers, elder brothers, Masters, sages, seers, etc. They are human beings who, through self-directed evolution and spiritual striving over many lifetimes, have attained a lofty spiritual and intellectual state. They are farther advanced evolutionarily than the majority of people, possessing great knowledge and powers; but their primary duty is the instruction and protection of mankind. From this body of advanced human beings, which has existed since humanity attained self-consciousness, have come the great teachers and the wisdom at the root of the world's great religious, philosophic, and scientific systems.
3. As to the received Teachings of the Masters (and accounting for the methodologies of the production of many if not most of the world's true Holy Scriptures) ...

• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]There have been four methods employed in transmitting this teaching from the Tibetan [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica][a Master][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]to the general public.
  [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]1. Clairaudience - [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]In the early stages (for the first two years), the Tibetan dictated the material incorporated in the first two books clairaudiently to Mrs. Bailey.
  [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]2. Telepathy - [/FONT]When Mrs. Bailey became more accustomed to this work, and when the discipline and diet necessarily began to take effect, the work was gradually changed and now ... it [is] entirely telepathic.
  [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]3. Clairvoyant vision - [/FONT]The various symbols in the books (and there are many) have been shown to Mrs. Bailey and then described by her.
  [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]4. Bringing through after sleep that which has been seen or heard while out of the physical body at night.[/FONT]

& 4. This is so self-evident that no quotation from any source is necessary.

The first three definitions provided can be credited to the Encyclopedic Theosophical Glossary compiled by G. de Purucker ... although the source material itself comes from H.P. Blavatsky's The Secret Doctrine, which itself is not a new set of teachings, but simply a presentation of Doctrines extant, such as the one given that has The Egyptian Book of the Dead for its origin.

The source of the description of Alice Bailey's methods for producing her 19 volumes of Teaching is The Beacon Magazine, June 1925. At request, I could provide offhand at least a dozen examples of this type of writing from authors other than H.P. Blavatsky and Alice Bailey, none of whom were writing as unconcious mediums, using automatic writing, or any other form of "divination" which might not come under the heading of the excercise of the faculties described in #1 above, and detailed under #3.

sighhh ... So `The Bible' for the esotericist is every Bible. It is truth, wherever Truth is found, and a ready answer is available for anyone who accuses the esotericist of pure relativism, or of formulating his own truths, or deciding them arbitrarily. Such an accusation will be countered with the testimony of every world religion, from the well-known to the very obscure, which all state in their Teachings that there are standards, there are Laws, and there are Presences - which together Guide our evolution, and ensure that the Plan of the Highest God be carried out. That the Will of Deity is in many ways inscrutable to us, none should argue. But that we are never meant to know, the esotericist will reject as a far worse blasphemy than to say that we can know! For if we are to forever labor in the darkness of ignorance and under the yoke of imperfection, then foolish, imperfect works will forever be the fruit. And while that may be satisfactory to the atheist, the materialist or the skeptic - it is not enough ... for those who tread The Way.

Om Tat Sat,

andrew

 

[inhumility]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

Hi,
It is true, as commented by a respected member of the CR, that the challenge/principle that “The claim and the reasons or arguments should be from the Revealed Book one follows” is from Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the founder of the Ahmadiyya Community. I liked the principle when I read it when I was just a child and still I am convinced that it is a very useful principle of comparative study of religions. At least one should confine, in all fairness, if one is a follower of a religion that one should not exceed the Book one believes has been revealed by God and the arguments presented by one should also be inferred clearly from the Book one believes in. No doubt that in faith I am a follower of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad but that is because I have not yet found any other faith that would convince me that they are better guided and truth is more with them. I am not a blind follower of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. I am an open mind. The purpose of this exercise is that one could clearly explore the truth between the religions of the world under a common, simple yardstick and follow the best religion one finds among them. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908) died a hundred years ago; he presented this criterion in an Interfaith Conference in the year 1896, the paper/book which he wrote is already translated in many languages of the world and published under the title “Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam”. Please make a search under the name “Mirza Ghulam Ahmad” in Wikipedia and read the paper titled above among his writings. The challenge as also its explanation and its implementation is available therein. This is a useful challenge. The followers of all other religions/denominations are exhorted to face this challenge singly or collectively for benefit of the people at large, for a comparison. A great characteristic of this book is that other religions/faiths have not been attacked and the author only confined himself to expressing merits and beauties of the religion he believed in.

 

[Devadatta]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

On his own part Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad set out this epoch making principle in an Inter-Religions Conference in the year 1896 and then he proved that the religion of his choice has claim and arguments on the five basic questions facing by humanity:-

• The Physical, Moral, and Spiritual States of Man.
• What is the State of Man After Death?
• The Object of Man's Life and the Means of its Attainment.
• The Operation of the Practical Ordinances of the Law in This Life and the Next.
• Sources of Divine Knowledge.

The conference had given these questions on which the participant speakers had to speak.
I leave the solutions to the respected members. Try for the Religion of your choice. Best of luck!

Is this approach really all that open? Certainly, it's better than slamming other traditions or clinging to orthodoxy. And it may be useful way for some traditions to compare notes. On the other hand, framing specific questions this way kinds of loads the dice, and one can't help feeling it's aiming at a certain outcome. I'm reminded of the Buddha, who refused to answer certain metaphysical questions. To agree to the validity of a set of questions is to already accede to a set of assumptions.

Sincerely,
Devadatta

 

[Mick]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

Hi,
It is true, as commented by a respected member of the CR, that the challenge/principle that “The claim and the reasons or arguments should be from the Revealed Book one follows” is from Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the founder of the Ahmadiyya Community. I liked the principle when I read it when I was just a child and still I am convinced that it is a very useful principle of comparative study of religions. At least one should confine, in all fairness, if one is a follower of a religion that one should not exceed the Book one believes has been revealed by God and the arguments presented by one should also be inferred clearly from the Book one believes in. No doubt that in faith I am a follower of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad but that is because I have not yet found any other faith that would convince me that they are better guided and truth is more with them. I am not a blind follower of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. I am an open mind. The purpose of this exercise is that one could clearly explore the truth between the religions of the world under a common, simple yardstick and follow the best religion one finds among them. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908) died a hundred years ago; he presented this criterion in an Interfaith Conference in the year 1896, the paper/book which he wrote is already translated in many languages of the world and published under the title “Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam”. Please make a search under the name “Mirza Ghulam Ahmad” in Wikipedia and read the paper titled above among his writings. The challenge as also its explanation and its implementation is available therein. This is a useful challenge. The followers of all other religions/denominations are exhorted to face this challenge singly or collectively for benefit of the people at large, for a comparison. A great characteristic of this book is that other religions/faiths have not been attacked and the author only confined himself to expressing merits and beauties of the religion he believed in.

Inhumility,

I am satisfied that you are comfortable in the belief system you have chosen. This exercise seems to have given you great stead and, as I told you in a private message in response to your prodding me to answer your challenge, I will as time permits.

The exercise that has served me well is described by 'Abdu'l-Baha, the son and servant of Baha'u'llah. He said concerning,

Independent investigation of truth

"Furthermore, know ye that God has created in man the power of reason, whereby man is enabled to investigate reality. God has not intended man to imitate blindly his fathers and ancestors. He has endowed him with mind, or the faculty of reasoning, by the exercise of which he is to investigate and discover the truth, and that which he finds real and true he must accept." `Abdúl-Bahá, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 291.

I invite you to investigate the claims of Baha'u'llah, for that is what you have asked me to do for you; to prove the validity of Baha'u'llah and all His claims.

If I follow the precepts that your originator has set forth, I may prove these claims, but to whom? To you? Maybe. But then what? The acceptance of the truth of a "delivered" message, that it came from God and is being disseminated by His Chosen One, should be carefully perused and prayed over. Understanding God's expectations of us shouldn't be considered as a contest, I wouldn't think, but should be approached with the concern and deportment of the most important issue a person will ever face.

Again, as an exercise, I will try to answer the questions put forth as time permits, but until then, I would suggest you investigate as well.

warmly,

Mick

 

[inhumility]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

I understand that there are certain reservations of the members regarding the principle, therefore, for further elaboration I reproduce hereunder (!) An announcement made in this regard before this paper, Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam, was read in the Conference and (2) also first page of the above paper/book:-

(1)​

“A GRAND PIECE OF NEWS FOR SEEKERS AFTER TRUTH​

In his announcement Swami Shugan Chandra Sahib has invited the leading divines of Muslims, Christians and Aryas, in the name of God, that they should set forth the excellences of their respective faiths in the Conference proposed by him. We wish to inform Swami Sahib that to do honor to the name of God, as mentioned by him we are ready to comply with his request and, if God so wills, our paper will be read in the proposed conference. Islam is a faith which directs a true Muslim to demonstrate prefect obedience when he is called upon to do something in the name God. We shall now see how much regard his brothers the Aryas and the Christian divines have for the honour of Permeshwar or for Jesus and whether they are ready to participate in the conference which is to be held in the name of the Glorious Holy One.
In the conference of great Religions which will be held in Lahore Town Hall on the 26th, 27th and 28th of December 1896, a paper written by this humble one, dealing with the excellences and miracles of the holy Quran, will be read out. This paper is not the result of ordinary human effort but is a sign among the signs of God, written with His special support. It sets forth the beauties and truth of the Holy Quran and establishes like the noon-day sun that the Holy Quran is in truth God’s own Word and is a Book revealed by the Lord of all creation. Everyone who listens to this paper from the beginning to the end, to my treatment of all the five themes prescribed for the Conference, will, I am sure, develop a new faith and will perceive a new light shining within him and will acquire a comprehensive commentary on the Holy Word of God. This paper of mine is free from human weakness, empty boasts and vain assertions.
I Have been moved by sympathy of my fellow beings to make this announcement, so that they should witness the beauty of the Holy Quran and should realize how mistaken are our opponents in that they love darkness and hate light. God, the All–Knowing has revealed to me that my paper will be declared supreme over all other papers. It is full of the light of truth, wisdom and understanding which will put to shame all other parties , provided they attend the Conference and listen to it form beginning to end. They will not be able to match these qualities from their scriptures, whether they are Christians or Aryas or those of Sanatan Dharm, or any others, because God Almighty has determined that the glory of His Holy Book shall be manifested on that day. I saw in a vision that out of the unseen a hand was laid on my mansion and by the touch of that hand a shining light emerged from the mansion and spread itself in all directions. It also illumined my hands. Thereupon someone who was standing by me proclaimed in loud voice: Allahu Akbar, Kharibat Khaibar (God is Great, Khaibar has fallen). The interpretation is that by my mansion is meant my heart on which the heavenly light of the verities of the holy Quran is descending, and by Khaibar are meant all the perverted religions which are afflicted with paganism and falsehood, in which man has been raised to occupy the place of God, or in which divine attributes have been cast down from their perfect station. It was thus disclosed to me that a wide publication of this paper would expose the untruth of false religions and the truth of the Quran will spread progressively around the earth till it arrives at its climax. From this vision my mind moved towards the reception of revelation and I received the revelation (Arabic) God is with you, and God stands where you stand. This is a metaphor conveying the assurance of Divine support.
I need write no more. I urge everyone to attend the conference in Lahore even at some inconvenience and to listen to these verities. If they do so their reason and their faith will derive such benefit as is beyond their expectation. Peace be upon those who follow the guidance.
Ghulam Ahmad
Quadian, 21 December 1896.

(2)​

“In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Ever Merciful. We praise Him and call down His blessings on His Noble Messenger.​

Islam​

It is necessary that a claim and the reason in support of it must be set forth from a revealed book.
In this auspicious Conference the purpose of which is that those who have been invited to participate in it should expound the merits of their respective religions with reference to the questions that have been formulated, I shall today set forth the merits of Islam. Before I proceed to do so I deem it proper to announce that I have made it obligatory upon myself that whatever I state will be based upon the Holy Quran which is the Word of God Almighty. I consider it essential that everyone who follows a book, believing it to be revealed, should base his exposition upon that book and should not so extend the scope of his advocacy of his faith as if he is compiling a new book. As it is my purpose today to establish the merits of the Holy Quran and to demonstrate its excellence, it is incumbent upon me not to state anything which is not comprehended in the Quran and to set forth everything on the basis of its verses and in accord with their meaning and that which might be inferred from them, so that those attending the Conference should encounter no difficulty in carrying out comparison between the teaching of different religions. As all those who believe in a revealed book will also confine themselves to statements comprised in their respective revealed books, I shall not make any reference to the tradition of the Holy Prophet, inasmuch as all true traditions are only explanatory of the holy Quran which is a prefect book comprehending all other books. In short this is the day of the manifestation of the glory of the Holy Quran and I humbly beseech God Almighty to assist me in this undertaking. Amen.”

 

[Vajradhara]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

Namaste inhumility,

Buddha Dharma does not have a revealed book or any sort of revelation from a deity therein.

metta,

~v

 

[inhumility]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

Swami Shugan Chandar had conceived the idea of holding a Conference of different religions/faiths to provide an opportunity to the truth-seekers in them for an Inter-Religious comparison and he approached all the leading figures of Religions in India and even personally visited and exhorted them to participate in the Conference and answer the five questions from the scriptures they believed in, the answers of which he thought was vital for the moral and spiritual uplift of fellow humans. India was most suited at that time to hold such a conference as followers of almost all big religions were present in India and the proverbial justice of British Rule facilitated it and provided the necessary security.
So, in fact, the questions were not selected by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadi as some members of the CR have opined, however, in an announcement published by him; Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, requested the participants to make the most use of the Conference and for that he proposed that Claim & Reason should be given by the participants from the Revealed Book of the Religion of the speakers to facilitate an easy comparison. He himself, voluntarily, adhered to it very sincerely. Even otherwise whenever he addressed a gathering or he wrote an essay or a book on a religious topic he made it a point that he generally quoted the references for Claim & Reason from Quran, the pristine revealed book of Islam.
Now a hundred years have passed by. Still there are many truth seekers in the world who would respond to the call of their conscience and select for themselves the truth at all and every cost. I am also a very humble student in this regard. The world is now a global village; to commemorate the event and the centenary of the Conference and to remember the zeal and sincerity of Swami Shugan Chandar and Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad; I have started the thread. It is a good opportunity for sincere truth seekers in all the religions and for benefit of the human beings in the world in general to contribute to this effort, singly or jointly or collectively. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad died in 1908 and the paper“Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam” which he wrote is already published and he cannot add anything to it. Others can read his wonderful paper and even then try to respond to the five topics /questions. , complying with the principle “Claim & Reason should be from the Revealed Book” as explained above.
The call is to everybody‘s conscience who believes that his religion, in its present form is all but truth and nothing but truth, and is best suited for the human beings on earth. If one can write one should write and his effort would be judged by the conscience of the other fellow human beings. This would be a service to humans which only God could reward. Many a selfless people would come forward and would not shy away from this important task, more particularly, the CR members. This in not a contest to establish unnecessarily supremacy of one religion on any other religion or intended to win or lose, this contest is for excellence. If this could happen a hundred years ago; it would happen now, every body should pray in this regard.
As for as Ahmadis are concerned; they are better represented by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Quadian whose role model paper is already published.
Please treat this as an easy to understand tool of Comparative Religions. And this is also useful for inter-denomination comparison with a slight modification.
No formality is needed. No superiority over others is desired. It is an open, unbiased and neutral principle for every body; even easier for the new writers as at least they have a model test paper before them.

 

[YO-ELEVEN-11]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

Being a non-religious person and not subscribing to religious dogmatic practices, I feel the statements below are cause for review by all of humanity and not just religious people. I will however give my opinion on the subject matter.


The Physical, Moral, and Spiritual States of Man.

Physical, moral, and spiritual states have a "tie" that binds them
causing man to have to balance the three for ultimate peace.
The task of doing so is not easy, but can be done if we as humans
concetrate on the task.

Example: The art of healing does not have to be a long and cumberson process, but introducing other elements to the process i.e. non-critical drugs, makes it become a process that is more cumberson than it needs to be. Simply put "KISS IT" (keep it simple sam).

I feel that religious domga makes the process of balancing our physical, spiritual, and moral states more cumberson than it needs to be.


What is the State of Man After Death?

The state of man after death is the "physical", "spiritual" and moral states combined. It is in essence, taking all three and combining them. Death is not an act of renewal or an end to us, but a way for us to understand and "agree" that we must take time to "understand" each other before our "states" combine and lead us to the grave.



The Object of Man's Life and the Means of its Attainment.

The object of "man's" life "is" the means of it attainment.
i.e. a child does not ask to be born, but when the time comes is pushed out and given the things to survive, but is not given the purpose of its life. Ultimatelty leading that child to want to balance his or her spiritual, moral and physical states. After which, wanting to know how and why life was attained in the first place. Life is attained through wanting to know its attainment. Simply put, humans attained life after which there was no turning back. A child can no more climb back in the womb, than man can reach back and fully understand the attainment of life.

The attainment of life should not be fully understood, but looked at as a chance to grow.



The Operation of the Practical Ordinances of the Law in This Life and the Next.

Ordinances and law, should, in essence be how we "communicate" on this planet as a whole. Humans are not that much different from each other in the way practice beliefs systems. The catch 22 with laws and ordinances is that they will always change and grow with us. i.e. no law or practical ordincnce will stay static in any belief system. As we grow on this planet, so will the ideas of the operation of the practical ordinances of the law in this life as well as the next.




Sources of Divine Knowledge.

Divine knowledge is not given by a source or sources at all, but is part of our gift of "life". In other words, we should not worry about the source, but how we as humans deal with each other upon knowing something good. In other words, The act of cooking is a process that is good. We as humans should not worry so much about who invented the act of cooking, but cook because it can be beneficial to all.





​

 

[gwenwifar23]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

Is a religion truthfull when it is born?
What is the difference between religion and science?

The following is a short translation of chapter 9 of the book "Cirkels van Licht en Liefde" (Circles of Light and Love) of Andreas Firewolf. The title of that chapter is: "Wetenschap en geloof" (Science and faith). It is a revolutionary book. In fact, Andreas Firewolf has been persecuted during the '90's because people could not cope with the things he stated.

The whole book is made available online in PDF-format on http://www.andreas333.com/nl/cursus/cirkel

if this is read by a publisher: Please contact Andreas Firewolf if you want to translate and publish his work in english. He has written more than a dozen books. His Runic-tarot is famous, as is his book Kundalini-yoga. You can email him at info@andreas333.com
​

A small part of his site is in english. http://www.andreas333.com
​

Weten-schap means litterally: Knowledge-board. It is a board with peaces of knowledge on it. That is what science really is. It is a heap with peaces of knowledge.
And that is also true for any religion. Any religion can be seen as a heap of peaces of knowledge.

What is the difference between any religion and science? According to Andreas Firewolf:

Scientists try to falsify knowledge-clusters from their heap of knowledge. When a knowledge-cluster is falsified it is removed from the heap. The knowledge-clusters on the heap of science are accepted as long as they are not falsified. In this way science tries to be up-to-date.
Religions as known in the west (the religions of jews, christians and muslims) started with acceptable knowledge-clusters when they were founded. But the jews did something fundamentally wrong. They stated, that their heap of knowledge-clusters came directly from god. "Thou shall not cast doubt on the holy scripture and those who do shall be removed from society (killed)". The christians and muslims copied this dogma. The main difference with science is: Scientists try to falsify their knowledge-clusters, jews, christians and muslims do not allow themselves to question their knowledge-clusters. Because of this, their religions became stagnant.
​

There is some difference with some forms of bhudism and jnana-yoga. Some of their practitioners really try to falsify their knowledge-clusters and operate like scientists.

According to Andreas Firewolf:

Science is not scientific. The knowledge-clusters on the heap of science are not proven to be true. Scientists believe in their knowledge-clusters. So they are true believers themselves. They have faith in gravity.
The main difference is, that scientists use the scientific method. The scientific method makes them scientists. According to the scientific method:
1. Make a statement about a knowledge-cluster that can be falsified.
1a. When it is not possible to make such a statement, the knowledge-cluster is out of scope with science. It does not belong to the domain of science. For example: the survival of the soul after the death of the physical body can not be falsified. It does not belong to the domain of science.
​

2. After making such a statement, try to falsify the statement. When the statement is falsified, you know that the knowledge-cluster is wrong and you remove it from the scientific heap.
​

According to Andreas Firewolf:

We can not live without faith. We can not know anything for sure. We believe in gravity, because we can not falsify it. We can believe in god or in our own soul. The concept of god and the concept of soul is not within the domain of science because science can not falsify those concepts.
However, we can make statements about the effects of the believe in god or in the soul. For example:
People who believe in god or in reincarnation cope better with problems than people who reject such beliefs.
This statement can be falsified, so it belongs to the scientific domain. It is quite easy to divide a number of people in believers and non-believers of some statement and to follow these people for a number of years. Then you can make statements about the effect of a certain believe on the well-being of people. You can also make statements on the chances of long-term survival of a group of believers or non-believers. Those that believe that smoking 72 cigarettes a day is beneficial for their soul are likely to die young.
​

Suppose you have a cult. Followers of this cult believe that it is wrong to have sex. When you follow them, you notice that they become extinct in one generation. Then you can draw the conclusion that it is an unhealthy believe.
Suppose you have a cult. Followers have to commit suicide at the age of 25. You notice that there are no members older than 25. You come to the conclusion that that cult is very unhealthy.
These examples are a little ridiculous. But they show how religious commandments can be beneficial or maleficial. And one can make scientific statements about the effects on our earthly life of any commandment of any religion.
You can use economic-darwinism on religion. Any old religion has to have some benefits. When a new religion replaces an older religion it has to be better adapted to the needs of that time. It is not survival of the fittest, but survival of the one who fits best in the niche were it thrives.

 

[inhumility]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

I want to add more details of the Inter-Religions Conference of 1896.
“A person named Swami Sadhu Shugan Chandar who had served for three four years for reformation of Kaesth, a Hindu community; he thought in1892 that unless all get together there is no use. At last he conceived the idea to convene a Religious Conference, the first of it was conducted in Ajmeer. Then he selected Lahore as an appropriate venue for the second Conference, being conducive for inter-faith dialogue and then he got busy for it. The Swami made a Committee to make arrangement of this Religious Conference whose chairman was named Master Durga Parshad and Lala Dhampat Roy B.A., L.L.B., a Hindu pleader of Chief Court of Lahore, who was selected as Chief Secretary of the Committee.
The dates of the Conference were fixed to be held on 26, 27,28th December in 1896 and following six Moderators were nominated:-

• Mr. Roy Bahadur Babu Partool Chand, Judge, Chief Court of Punjab.
• Mr. Khan Bahadur Shaikh Khuda Bux, Judge Small Cause Court Lahore.
• Mr. Roy Bahadur Pundit Radha Kishan Cool, Pleader Chief Court, ex-Governor Jammu.
• Hazrat Moulvi Hakim Nooruddin, Royal Physician (of Jammu and Kashmir).
• Mr. Roy Bahwani Das, M.A .Extra Settlement Officer Jhelum.
• Mr. Sardar Jowahar Singh, Secretary Khalsa Committee, Lahore.

(Report Jalsa Great Religions, Page 253,254 printed by Siddiqui Press, Lahore 1897)
Swami Shugan Chandar also expressed in a published announcement and gave a covenant to Muslims, Christians and Aryas (Hindus) and beseeched their renowned religious scholars to commit themselves to participate in the Conference to elucidate merits of their religions. He mentioned that in the proposed Inter-Religions Conference, which would take place in Town Hall, Lahore the purpose of the Conference was only to provide opportunity to the truthful Religion to prove its verities in a civilized public gathering, so that the love of truthful religion gets deeply penetrated in the hearts of the people by reasons and arguments which they discern. Every religion is represented by its eminent scholars so that they can express and put deep into the heart of the audience the facts and excellencies of their religion and the audience are also provided with the opportunity of listening to the speeches of the eminent scholars of the religion in their selected gathering and make a comparative study and where they see the glitter of truth thy could accept it.
In the present era, due to the religious encounters, there is a desire among the people to explore for the truthful religion; to achieve this end it seems most appropriate that, the scholars of every religion, who are already committed and are used to deliver such lectures to propagate their religion; such people should gather at one place and make speeches and express the merits of their religion complying the announced questions. .Hence in such a meeting where elders of all religions have gathered the light of the truthful religion would definitely outshine the others. This is the purpose of this convention. The able lecturers of every religion know for certain that it is their duty to express the truth of their religion, and since purpose of this meeting facilitates their motive they should now feel free to express the verities and excellences of their religion, so they should in fact use this opportunity which God has granted them which one seldom gets.
Then he wrote motivating them. A man who knows about others that they are suffering from some fatal disease, and he knows the remedy of that disease and knows that they will get cured if he provided the remedy; I can’t believe that such person will hesitate in providing the treatment, while that person claims that he loves the humanity, he won’t intentionally stop to help them if he is called for help by such poor patients. My heart is eager to know that it is proved as to which religion is in fact full of truths and facts. I don’t find words to express true enthusiasm in this regard. The representatives of different religions accepted the invitation of the Swami and confirmed their participation in the Inter-Religions Conference in the Christmas holidays in Dec. 1896 at Lahore. The representatives of almost all religions participated in the Conference to respond to 5 questions which the Committee has publicized and for which the Committee had put a condition that every speaker would try to confine his response from the Holy Book he had already accepted as sacred. (The representatives of following religions participated in the conference which took place on the dates fixed for it, Sanatan Dharm, Hinduism, Arya Samaj, Free Thinkers, Barhamu Samaj, Theosophical Society, Religion of Harmony. Christians, Islam, Sikhism.)
But in reality there was only one speech which truly and completely covered the answers of the given questions. It is difficult to narrate the scene- the influence of the speech on the audience when Hazrat Moulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoty read the paper of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, in a very ecstatic style which filled ears with a lovable voice to the enjoyment of all. There was not a single person of whatever religion who did not enjoy the pleasure of the speech and who did not show and record his pleasure in a loud gesture of the pleasure or applause.
There was no person who did not feel the trance and was not carried away by the eloquent speech. The style of the speech invoked the interest of all and every body enjoyed. Even the opponents were praising the speech which truly spoke of the high quality of the essay. One of the renowned and popular English Newspapers of India, The Civil & Military Gazette of Lahore, which was a Christian Newspaper praised the Essay and mentioned it as the only essay worth mentioning.
The time allotted for the Essay, written by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, was only two hours, but the interesting essay could not be finished in this time, so the Moderators of the Conference added one day of 29the Dec. 1896 so that the reading of the essay could be completed. Punjab Observer, a daily, praised the essay and filled columns after columns .Other newspapers e.g. Paisa Akhbar, Chowdween Sadi, Sadiqul Akhbar, Mukhbare Deccan ,General Gohar Asifi of Calcutta, all newspapers concurred in the praise and excellence of the Essay. Other neutral communities and followers of other religions also confirmed the supremacy of the essay over others. Mr. Dhampat Roy, the secretary of the Religions Conference made following observation in the published Report of the Conference
“There was an interval of one and a half hour after which the lecture of Mr. Pundit Ghurdun Das was to be delivered; but because one of the renowned representatives of Islam was to present his essay, the eager audience did not leave their seats and kept seated on their seats. There was still some time when at 1.30 PM the essay was to be read, the vast building of Islamia College began being filled hurriedly and it was full to its capacity within no time .There were about 7000 to 8000 people gathered to listen it. A large number of intelligentsia of different Religions and communities were present. The chairs, benches, and carpet flooring, arranged in abundance, were full and many a people had but to hear the speech in standing. Many Professors, Barristers, Pleaders, Government Officials, Extra-Assistants, Doctors were among those who were standing, the way these dignitaries of all classes and segments were standing with patience and listening to the lecture showed how much these people had attachment and eagerness with this comparison of religions. The lecturer, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, though was not present on the occasion himself yet he especially sent one of his able disciples namely Moulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoty to read the written paper that showed how much these were influenced by this movement. The Committee had allocated the time of only one hour for the lecture but the audience got so much interested in the paper that the Moderator had to announce due to increased interest of the audience that the time would be extended till the lecture is finished. This was in fact to the heartiest assent of the audience, so much so that the next speaker Moulvi Abu Yousuf Mubarak Ali voluntarily allowed that his time should also be given to finish the paper. This was according to the wish of the Moderators as also the audience and they expressed their joy and assent loudly and thanked the Moderators and the Moulvi Sahib with applause. The scheduled time was to finish by 4.20 PM but owing to the interest of the audience it was continued up to 5.30 PM as the written paper was read in about four hours and the audiences were glued to their seats to listen it form beginning to the end.”
(This is a faithful and free translation made by me for the CR members. For the original in Urdu, please refer to the preface by the publisher of Roohany Khazaen Volume -10, pages 8-12).

 

[Bill]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

Hi,

May I be permitted to take a different tack? I often feel that the value of a question lies in the nature of questions, rather than in any answers they may provide.

The reality taught to us by science and history is that behind every question stand more questions. Every time we think we have an answer, we have simply not thought the answer through properly. In truth we simply have another question.

The danger with answers is that we can believe that we have the final answer, the truth beyond all others, a dogma, an article of faith, which would be heretical to question. Down this path is found some of the worst horrors of the last century.

My view is that there is only one answer beyond which there are no further questions, I call that answer God ("...by whichsoever name ye will, invoke Him: He hath most excellent names" Qur'án 17:110).

Baha’u’llah, quoting a Hadith wrote "Knowledge is a single point, but the ignorant have multiplied it." All other answers are illusions; there are really only more questions. I firmly believe that down this path is found tolerance and compassion.

Brownoski wrote, in his book “The Ascent of Man” a chapter in which he compared certainty and knowledge. True knowledge, he argued, doubted itself and saw its own limitations, saw itself in relation to the vastness of creation; certainty on the other hand is a very dangerous attitude.

The 5 questions posed have all been addressed in the great revealed religions, and commented on well by the other contributors, and all draw anyone thinking about them closer to the mystery we call God, whatever tradition they ascribe to. And that mystery is ultimately knowable only in the perfection of our true self.

Bill

 

[Ron Price]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

It has been nearly two months since this thread began its existence in this piece of cyberspace. Already there is a lengthy discussion with many facets of the initial question surveyed, with opinions outliend in brief. I will write briefly about "the greatest principle of comparative studies of religions and interfaith dialogue."
____________________
Apologetics is a branch of systematic theology, although some experience it’s thrust in religious studies or philosophy of religion courses. Some encounter it on the internet for the first time in a more populist and usually much less academic form. As I see it, apologetics is primarily concerned with the protection of a religious position, the refutation of that position's assailants and, in the larger sense, the exploration of that position in the context of prevailing philosophies and standards in a secular and pluralistic society. Apologetics, to put it slightly differently, is concerned with answering critical inquiries, criticism of a position, in a rational manner. Apologetics is not possible, it seems to me anyway, without a commitment to and a desire to defend a position. Everyone's position is, in a broad sense, religious--it is religious in the sense that everyone has assumptions and gathers his or her emotions around those assumptions. Assumptions are concerned, in the areas discussed here, with very basic questions about life.

For me, the core of my position I could express in one phrase: the Baha'i Revelation. With that said, though, the activity I engage in, namely, apologetics, is a never ending exercise. The apologetics that concerns me is not so much Christian apologetics, secular apologetics or Islamic apologetics, but Baha'i apologetics. There are many points of comparison and contrast, though, which I won't go into here. Christians will have the opportunity to defend Christianity by the use of apologetics; agnostics will defend their agnosticism, atheists their atheism, etc. And I will in turn defend the Baha'i Faith by the use of apologetics. In the process we will all, hopefully, learn something about our respective Faiths, our religions, our intellectual and philosophical positions which we hold to our hearts dearly.

At the outset, then, in this my first posting, my intention is simply to make this start, to state what you might call "my apologetics position" as the foundation for a discussion of the initial question that started this thread. This brief statement indicates, in broad outline, where I am coming from in the weeks and months ahead. -Ron Price with thanks to Udo Schaefer, "Baha'i Apologetics?" Baha'i Studies Review, Vol. 10, 2001/2002.
_______________________
As an extension of this brief statement above let me add a second part to compelte more fully this foundation stone for a discussion of this "greatest principle." This foundation is essentially an outline of my basic orientation to Baha’i apologetics. Critical scholarly contributions or criticism raised in public or private discussions about questions, issues and statements like the one we are concerned with here and which are an obvious part of apologetics should not necessarily be equated with hostility. Often questions are perfectly legitimate aspects of a person's search for an answer to an intellectual conundrum. Paul Tillich once expressed the view that apologetics was an "answering theology."(Systematic Theology, U. of Chicago, 1967, Vol.1, p6.)

I have always been attracted to the founder of the Baha'i Faith's exhortations in discussion to "speak with words as mild as milk," with "the utmost lenience and forebearance." I am also aware that, in cases of rude or hostile attack, rebuttal with a harsher tone may well be justified. It does not help an apologist to belong to those "watchmen" the prophet Isaiah calls "dumb dogs that cannot bark."(Isaiah, 56:10) At the same time, I am not one to use a harsh tone; I prefer mildness and, if I must be critical, humour and sarcasm, irony--all in the context of an etiquette of expression. For without that etiquette and a certain acute judgement, one can easily get into a slanging match which no one wins.

Motive, manner, mode, style, tone, a judicious exercise in wordsmithing that avoids dissidence--all are an important component of this etiquette of expression. This is so important because, in its essence, apologetics is a kind of confrontation, an act of revealing one's true colours, of hoisting the flag, of demonstrating essential characteristics of one's faith: one's assumptions and the place where one's emotions tend to gravitate around.

Dialogue, as Hans Kung puts it, "does not mean self-denial."(quoted by Udo Schaefer, "Baha'i Apologetics," Baha'i Studies Review, Vol.10, 2001/2) Schaefer goes on: "A faith that is opportunistically streamlined, adapting to current trends, thus concealing its real features, features that could provoke rejection in order to be acceptable for dialogue is in danger of losing its identity."

It is almost impossible to carry the torch of truth through a crowd without getting someone's beard singed. In the weeks that follow, my postings will probably wind up singing the beards of some readers and, perhaps, my own in the process. Such are the perils of dialogue, of apologetics. Much of Baha'i apologetics derives from the experience Baha'is have of a fundamental discrepancy between much in secular thought, much in the thought of the many religious positions around the globe and the Baha'i revelation on the other. In some ways, the gulf is unbridegeable but, so too, is this the case between the secular and much thought in the Christian revelation. So, too, is this the case in virtually all posiitons--that's what makes them unique positions--secular or sacred.

Anyway, that's all for now. It's back to the winter winds of Tasmania, about 3 kms from the Bass Straight on the Tamar River. The geography of place is so much simpler than that of the spiritual geography readers at this site are concerned with, although I am aware that whom the gods would destroy they first make simple and simpler and simpler. Even the geography of place, as any geographer will tell you, has its complexities too. I look forward to the continued dialogue in this thread. Here in far-off Tasmania--the last stop before Antarctica, if one wants to get there through some other route than off the end of South America--your postings will be gratefully read. -Ron Price, Tasmania.

 

[wizanda]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

Ok, as you asked me to add my experience, that is where I will begin; I remember way back in the beginning, we had one faith at a point in our culture and history as human race.
Where there was just one belief between us, this would be going back about after the flood, if we look where the earliest settled culture and where our history book says a flat plain…..
We have India and what was is one of the oldest religions there?
Vedanta

So it is not a new concept you are discussing, nothing has gone under the sun that hasn’t done at some point….
I am unsure if you understand the principles of Vedanta yet my understanding is this:
All Religions discuss parts of the whole; God is one and has many different names and reflections… so in all books there is wisdom to be learned…. Even in folly; as this even if you miss it, and then this truly proves your heart….

Why the elders/ ascended masters/ angels set everyone up with the Bible and wide road, as we knew most would take the easy option and heaven is not about that.

So in your point I hear and see, yet let us all also remember that in the beginning we were one, this is what we lost, this is where our ego got in the way.

The age of Kali/metal Beast Empire is all about time and enforcing it over us, its time we all woke up….there are 13 months in the year.
365 divided by 28 (Luna/menstrual cycle) = 13.1
We live under roman rule still this is in all your books, under different figurative descriptions yet the same entity, in energy being described each time.

So a certain prophet is never the point it is the fact we all said the same, we are all going to for ever more as God is One. We come from heaven, it is one heart, one mind, one focus, and this is to allow you all to understand….
Oneness
One word
One Place
One World
One God
One Us
Oneness

That is heavens true name!

Hell on the other hand is dense energy and the basement of the universe on a metaphysical/spirit/matrix level; as said heaven is at hand, meaning its here within the matrix of reality.

So points over a time frame in the eye of God and heaven is none existent, if we wish to come close in human form and bound by time, we have to first learn to be free of it…

As in what Lao Tzu said “don’t worry about, I am this or I am; that just be…

In the beginning as a child you were one, we all are, that is our divine nature, yet as we grow we enforce mouldings on our self’s.
Changing languages so we don’t understand each other…. Haven’t you noticed you can have to children of different races and they can play…?
Get to adults and what has gone wrong???
We add edges we get hurt, we make boundaries in the way we speak, and Kids speak in whistling as do most animals they talk in a scale of music.

Heaven is the same as is the whole after life.

Also if God is the lord of the living and to live, in what way is any religious dogmatic behaviour helping you to live, in fact does it do the opposite in many cases and if live is opposite of its self isn’t this evil?

So yes I could spend ages studying all the posts of people and seeing where you are all heading in your spirits right now, yet there is one God guiding us…

How to tell the falsities in the books…..

My earthly dad lies terribly, well over exaggerates especially in the pub….When I was a child it was hard to tell, which bits were added and which was stable…..
So having this from an early age helped see this system…
Now in each story regardless if my dad adds bits, he would keep parts of the original, where his ego didn’t get in the way….
Same applies with our books, at points in all of them you can hear where the ego has got in the way…
So go through the books and understand the whole story each time, then observe them as one picture, like dad, by the end of the day I could see in between his entire story the reality as I heard it so many times.

Anyway just a suggestion, yet worked for me and this life is predestined, I live in.

Not sure how far to take, this yet I am sick of hiding behind the covers pretending its not me… you see if you check up the texts for the new name of Christ and then online what people are saying his new name is Sananda and in Hinduism and the person to come is Skanda. This doesn’t mean I am Christ, yet his brother and he won’t be back according to texts, until the ([FONT=&quot]ts=Zâmach/ ts=Zemach[/FONT]) fig/buds are out, pipes/anointed ones in Zechariah (ts=Zantârâh) the books are sorted, this has begun…

I died at 23, so am certain of who I am and really want to help everyone, if they can allow me the opportunity to explain… and not ban me from trying my best to be unbiased, which is hard considering I find some of the Biblical bits a personal attack on me, I remember my brothers life. I have had visions of how it feels to have your mother watch you die and nothing you can do about it… ok for you as you know you are safe, yet do you know how much pain a mother suffers to see that.

Anyway going off track, basically Heaven is one, at some point we will get around to drawing it, as I saw it when I was there last…
Basically is a circular, almost like an eye in the first level of heaven though all is equal like the eye each does its part.
You have love which is more white and less intense, this is what many draw as heaven as clouds, yet really it is dynamic strands of energy, that have become transcendental understanding loving to an unconditional oneness level; we all one! (Heaven sees your whole life and understands why in most cases.)
Next you have the inner circle which focuses energy of the universe in to code that is accessible to God i.e. intercessor (Christ in Isaiah 53), Buddha, Lao Tzu, Elijah, Moses to name a few, so can people stop arguing over who is better; as we don’t, lol!
The only thing above that level is God and no one thing can step into them shoes, as it is all the dynamic creative logical intrinsic knowledge and insight into the whole universe in single place….
There is no Devil, it has no opportunity to exist other the in mans ego and that is about it, hell (basement/Sheol) is watched by heaven; it has no physical control over the matrix it is surrounded in.
As you ascend through the dimensions/ commandments we have all written, then you have more control, it is mans choice to allow ego in…
It doesn’t help we drink death as a pastime like my dad his ego was huge in the PUB! Alcohol is well why we fell as it is fallen, (I could explain the dimensions, another time).
Christ said not to drink and they forged it blatantly as you can still see until this day the real translation, I ask you not to drink.


I hope that helps, as you asked for my experiences.

I will not stand by any one prophet, as all prophets are God’s to begin, so stand by the person who taught them.

Peace, Love AN Unity B WITH US

God Blesses you all

 

[Vajradhara]

Re: The Greatest Principle of Comparative Studies of Religions/Interfaith Dialogue

Namaste wizanda,

thank you for the interesting post.

As in what Lao Tzu said “don’t worry about, I am this or I am; that just be…

do you recall where you read this quote attributed to the Old Master?

In the beginning as a child you were one, we all are, that is our divine nature, yet as we grow we enforce mouldings on our self’s.

oh. well, this form does not have a divine nature. that is an adharmic belief.

Also if God is the lord of the living and to live, in what way is any religious dogmatic behaviour helping you to live, in fact does it do the opposite in many cases and if live is opposite of its self isn’t this evil?

i suppose it would depend on the particular practices, generalization of this nature is not likely to be all that productive. as for God being the lord of the living and to live, that is a matter of belief

Not sure how far to take, this yet I am sick of hiding behind the covers pretending its not me… you see if you check up the texts for the new name of Christ and then online what people are saying his new name is Sananda and in Hinduism and the person to come is Skanda. This doesn’t mean I am Christ, yet his brother and he won’t be back according to texts, until the ([FONT=&quot]ts=Zâmach/ ts=Zemach[/FONT]) fig/buds are out, pipes/anointed ones in Zechariah (ts=Zantârâh) the books are sorted, this has begun…

pardon me for being blunt. you feel that you are the Messiah and are lecturing the rest of the forum members on their ego? there is a teaching of Jesus which is apt here, the one of the splinter and the plank, i should think.

I died at 23, so am certain of who I am

the last words belie the first ones.

and really want to help everyone,

a very worthwhile endeavor and goal.

if they can allow me the opportunity to explain… and not ban me from trying my best to be unbiased, which is hard considering I find some of the Biblical bits a personal attack on me, I remember my brothers life.

please feel free to explain your points of view whilst remaining inside the Code of Conduct which you argreed to when you joined the forum.

Next you have the inner circle which focuses energy of the universe in to code that is accessible to God i.e. intercessor (Christ in Isaiah 53), Buddha

Buddhas are not intecessors to any deity they are, in fact, teachers of the deities. this is true of all Buddhas, not just Buddha Shakyamuni, by the by.

As you ascend through the dimensions/ commandments we have all written,

are you seriously asserting that you had a hand in writing the 10 Commandments? you will, no doubt, pardon me for being somewhat skeptical of this claim.

metta,

~v