Baha'i/Ananda Marga

[Avinash]

Namaskar,

>>>I've read a bit about Baha'i here in these forums and it strikes me as remarkably similar to another "new religious movement" that I have had some experience with called Ananda Marga. Like Baha'i, or rather what I know of Baha'i, Ananda Marga considers itself a universalist form of spirituality, yet reveres one man as a divine messenger, elevating him to god-like status.>>>

Ananda Marga does not consider itself as a "universalist form of spirituality" but as a mystical path. All mystical paths are seen as being the same Path of Bliss or Ananda Marga. Criticizing other paths is strongly discouraged in Ananda Marga but dogma, superstition, ritualism and sectarian attitudes as found in religions are criticized in the Guru's talks.

>>>Anandamurti[/b][/url] claimed to be the Guru of the entire human race (but don't tell any Margiis that I told you that here!). >>>

This "claim" of Anandamurti is never made explicit, nor is it ever propagated by his followers. However, in the teachings Shiva and Krishna are considered as 'Taraka Brahma' (a tantric concept), a kind of mediating (tangential) point between Saguna Brahma (expressed Consciousness) and Nirguna Brahma (unexpressed Consciousness).

It is up to the followers themselves to accept Anandamurti as another expression of Taraka Brahma or not but I have never heard anyone even discuss the matter in the years I was involved in this organisation. It simply has no significance for one's spiritual progress. Having said that, Ananda Marga is a mystical path, so sooner or later the Self is identified with the Guru, who is considered to be beyond time, place and person. So the actual Guru is not P.R.Sarkar the man.

>>>Before I close this post, I should clarify that I was involved with A.M. for around three years. I learned many, many helpful things, but in the end became disillusioned with the dogma that the organization subtly propagates in the name of universalism.>>>

Three years is a short time and not nearly enough to get to know an ideology or a movement well enough. Ananda Marga actually strongly opposes all kinds of dogma. If you mean that some of the members have expressed a kind of smugness about the superiority of the ideology of Ananda Marga then that says nothing about the ideology or indeed the organization as a whole. Such weaknesses can be found in members of any spiritual or religious organization and much more so in members of organizations with less mystical content.

>>>"Yes, yes, all those other faiths are good, but you should really listen to what ______ says, because he says it best. His is the word for present-day humanity.">>>

Never have I heard an Ananda Margi say such things like "His is the word for presentday humanity". However, considering that only Shiva and Krishna are recognized as earlier expressions of Taraka Brahma and that the qualifications for such an expression are very extensive and high, no other later historical figure besides Anandamurti would qualify. Nevertheless many of the talks of Anandamurti include teachings of Lord Buddha (who is addressed as Lord) and some of the practices in Ananda Marga were taken from the teachings of Buddha.

I have heard some of the teachings of the Bahai faith and the universal aspect seems to have some parallels with Ananda Marga ideology. However in Ananda Marga no-one is told they should change their faith because there is a better one. Rather spirituality is recognized in all mystical paths beyond the limitations of the sectarian religions.

Andrew

[barefootgal9]

Andrew,

I don't have time to reply in depth to your comments this morning. I will try to get back to the forum this evening to give your posts my full attention. I don't know anywere near enough about Anandamurti to make a point by point comparison.

Yes, the similarities are intriguing. But, on the surface at least, there seems to be a significant difference between Anandamurti's "Taraka Brahma" (if I am correct in assuming this is his term for a major Messenger/Intermediary and the concept of "Manifestation" taught by Baha'u'llah.

And it would seem that Baha'u'llah's embrace of the Messengers of the past may be broader than Anandamurti's - proposing that all the great Prophet/Founders of the west are part of the same unfolding plan of "progressive revelation."

I believe I may have posted some links back around post 2 or 3 in this thread. If you have the time and inclination, I would suggest you study the first few pages of Part II of Baha'u'llah's Kitab-i-Iqan which can be found at
http://bahai-library.com/

That these figures inauguerate major cycles in the unfoldment of human civilization, is one of the specific "indicators" of a major Manifestation in the Baha'i view. We also consider that They reveal teachings which "burst the wineskin" of the former dispensation to such a degree that it is not possible for them to be adequately understood and implemented from within the framework of the former faiths.

It would require extensive study and serious thought, I believe, to clearly apprehend the teachings of both "claimants" and make an informed decision as to which of these Figures more truly reveals Reality.

Perhaps you would have the time and interest to undertake it - today I must run.

I look forward to discussing the Ananadamurti movement with you further as I would like to learn more about it.

blessings & peace!
bfg

[smkolins]

Originally Posted by barefootgal9

That these figures inauguerate major cycles in the unfoldment of human civilization, is one of the specific "indicators" of a major Manifestation in the Baha'i view. We also consider that They reveal teachings which "burst the wineskin" of the former dispensation to such a degree that it is not possible for them to be adequately understood and implemented from within the framework of the former faiths.

I think there are two angles on the "burst the wineskin" aspect. One is that the religion at hand may be old and show its age (it's scripture doubtful, it's adminstration not as originally set out for whatever reason, it's traditions bound by unauthorized ideas....) In this sense the old religion may be so far from how it began that it's hard to recognize the original meaning of it's scriptures. However any serious effort to resolve the matter will require endless debate. So rather than do that the Manifestation addresses the same Source of the teachings and to the extent humanity now is the same as humanity then then the teachings are the same and to the extent that now is different from then, the teachings are different.

This idea is completely different than supposing that the old religion taught less truth than the new one. "To maintain that the testimony of Providence was incomplete, that it hath therefore been the cause of the denial of the people, is but open blasphemy. How far from the grace of the All-Bountiful and from His loving providence and tender mercies it is to single out a soul from amongst all men for the guidance of His creatures, and, on one hand, to withhold from Him the full measure of His divine testimony, and, on the other, inflict severe retribution on His people for having turned away from His chosen One! Nay, the manifold bounties of the Lord of all beings have, at all times, through the Manifestations of His divine Essence, encompassed the earth and all that dwell therein. Not for a moment hath His grace been withheld, nor have the showers of His loving-kindness ceased to rain upon mankind."

So God through His Messengers withheld nothing - on the other hand He also says " All that I have revealed unto thee with the tongue of power, and have written for thee with the pen of might, hath been in accordance with thy capacity and understanding, not with My state and the melody of My voice."

So God has not said everything He can say. This is a second sense in which the wineskin can burst - because the Ocean of God's knowledge can never be ultimately contained, but that in measure to the age is it revealed.

[smkolins]

I know the thread about women participating in the Administrative Order of the Baha'i faith has been back a while but it turns out some numbers can be had - with some difficulty. There is a unique publication, _The Baha'is_ which in a magazine format reviews and introduces the Faith and many qualities of it. Many people have this available in print. There is also a website based on it and a CD that can be ordered. That magazine has information in it on the female participation in the National Assemblies. However the online version of the document doesn't note those tables. Also I wrote to the House of Justice some years ago and got some extensions to the tables. Now the problem is I've got to dig up these documents from a while back and type them up or something.... It might take me a few days but I should be able to put something together for this.....

[Avinash]

Originally Posted by barefootgal9

Andrew,
Yes, the similarities are intriguing. But, on the surface at least, there seems to be a significant difference between Anandamurti's "Taraka Brahma" (if I am correct in assuming this is his term for a major Messenger/Intermediary and the concept of "Manifestation" taught by Baha'u'llah.

And it would seem that Baha'u'llah's embrace of the Messengers of the past may be broader than Anandamurti's - proposing that all the great Prophet/Founders of the west are part of the same unfolding plan of "progressive revelation."

That these figures inauguerate major cycles in the unfoldment of human civilization, is one of the specific "indicators" of a major Manifestation in the Baha'i view. We also consider that They reveal teachings which "burst the wineskin" of the former dispensation to such a degree that it is not possible for them to be adequately understood and implemented from within the framework of the former faiths.

Barefootgal9 Namaskar,

I find it somewhat difficult to discuss these matters with someone from a different background. Different movements use different ideas and ways of expressing them. I will find time to read some more about the thoughts of the founder of Bahai.

Taraka Brahma is a philosophical concept from Tantric philosophy to explain the advent of great gurus (Sadgurus) like Krishna and Shiva. They are supposed to have come at times when humanity was in great crises and the many prayers of suffering people caused Taraka Brahma to take a human body to change the destiny of humanity by His example, His work and His teachings. He would then move on to different planets in the universe.

But what about all the other great teachers and founders of religions? They may have been great or less great but they were born as humans with a past in previous incarnations. That's where they differ from Taraka Brahma, which is in fact a mysterious figure. It is not said that Taraka Brahma is an "incarnation of God" because it is impossible for God to incarnate himself in one body.

Some religions talk of prophets, messengers, messiahs, son of God or of avatars. In Tantric philosophy most of these would perhaps come under rishis ("wise men"). It is interesting that the only two persons to be called 'Lord' by Anandamurti are Lord Buddha and Lord Caitanya, who didn't claim any special title for themselves.

Once you're on a particular path and you feel comfortable with the philosophy, it's hard to get used to how other paths think and express themselves. With Buddhism and with other mystical paths however, I feel less of this difficulty.

I have sometimes wondered about why Taraka Brahma would each time be born and die in India. Perhaps this was the place where most people and mystics lived and where most major human cultures of the world came together and blended (Lord Shiva married a black girl, a white girl and a mongoloid girl).

Andrew

[smkolins]

Took me less time than I feared though I had to do some work getting it all together.... attached is a jpeg of the continental or quasi-continental averages of women elected to National Spiritual Assemblies. Note each Assembly is composed of nine people, elected by secret ballot with no electioneering (no "running" for office.) So one woman on average would mean 11% on the graph.

The closest I can come to documentation is _The Baha'is_ magazine which is in print widely. The data is extended by a letter received from the Research Dept. of the Universal House of Justice back in 1997. I do not have the particulars of that letter at my finger tips at this point but I'm still digging for it.

[smkolins]

The June 5th 2004 _American Baha'i_ newspaper had a table of info along the same lines but more particular to the US Baha'i community and its governing instituions, the Local Spiritual Assemblies (LSAs.)

To summarize from either 1997 or 2003 surveys:

LSA members (2003) 57% F 43% M
Overall population of Baha'is (1997) 60% F 39% M (1% not answered)
US nonprofit board members (2000) 8% F 92% M

and now a summary of racial backgrounds

LSA members (2003) 56% Cauc., 10% African Am. ...
Overall population of Baha'is (1997) 62% Cauc., 8% African Am. ...
US nonprofit board members (2000) 85% Cauc., 9% African Am. ...