Buddism and the Baha'i Faith

[smkolins]

One wonders how dead Buddhism has to be? I mean if it to be totally forgotten and a thing lost, there wouldn't be much point in making a prophecy that Maitreya would one day come.

On the other extreme, perhaps, one could suppose as soon as there are irreconsilable branches of a religion each claiming to "be" Buddism then there is no longer a single thing which "is" Buddhism. But that happened a long long time ago.

In one of Baha'u'llah's first works, the Book of Certitude, He describes how one of the qualities of religion is that it has historically oppressed the next Prophet - that the priests of the old religion, in holding to the outer forms have lost the spirit and perceive the threat to their lifestyle (though they imagine it to be of the loyal followers) in the new Prophet and make every attempt to stop that apparent heresy. Surely a religion is something like dead when it opposes it's fruition in the coming prophecy of the next Manifestation?

[Vajradhara]

well... Maitreya is going to arise because the Buddha Dharma is no longer present in this world system, acording to the scripture.

moreover, Maitreya will teach the same Dharma as did Shakyamuni, Dipankara, Kayaspa and so forth.

oh... and humans live for 80,000 years as well. even should that be considered a metaphor, the bit about humans says that there will only be three known "illnesses", last i checked, we seem to have a bit more than three of them.

of course, one of the tricky things to really get by is that there will be a Chakravatin ruling the entire world from India. last time i checked that, India didn't govern any nation other than itself.. and without a King, especially without a Wheel Turning King.

however, as a religious belief, there isn't really any issue with Baha'i belief regarding Maitreya and that Maitreya has already manifested, it just doesn't find any support in the Buddhist scripture, thus, i suspect that most Buddhists will view the Baha'i claim in the same respect as we view the claim of this Maitreya:

http://www.maitreya.org/English/Index.asp

[arthra]

Hi Vajra!

I think there's a lot of (for want of a better word) "hyperbole" in some these writings... and one should be careful in taking them so literally.

That last reference to maitreya.org was probably not that necessary.

I've met several Baha'is who had Buddhist backgrounds and they seem to have come to their own conclusions on the matter.

- Art

[Vajradhara]

Hi Art,

thank you for the post.

indeed, hence the Buddhas criteria for Acceptance and Rejection of a teaching

there are a great many beings that have claimed and continue to claim to be Maitreya, heck, even Lafayette Ron Hubbard also thought he was Maitreya that does not, however, mean that he was correct.

[arthra]

Yes Vajra...

A mere claim in and of itself should not be it's own criteria...there are other measurements.

- Art

[Nitai]

Here is an amazing explanation of a Buddhistic mantra

OM MANI PADME HUM

OM

* is always found in the beginning of the Vedic mantras
* it can refer to Brahman - the light aspect of God
* it can refer to Vishnu, the Supreme Lord and
* it can refer to Radha-Krishna the divine couple

MANI

* means jewel

PADME or PADMA

* means lotus flower

HUM

* is an exclamation of remembrance

** in the scripture called Brahma Samhita Radha and Krishna are described to be situated within Their spiritual divine abode that looks like a lotus flower
** considering this point of Brahma-Samhita the mantra

OM MANI PADME HUM is an invitation to meditate on

* OM - Radha-Krishna that are like
* MANI - jewels, and are situated within Their
* PADMA - lotus-like abode

* I am sure that any Buddhist who would chant this mantra meditating on the above meaning of this mantra can
* attain the same perfection like the most advanced Vaishnava devotees who worship the Divine couple Radha and Krishna
* IOW Their eternal, spiritual, supreme abode

Goura premanande Hari Hari bol
Hare Krishna

[arthra]

Thanks Nitai for your input I'm unsure though how relevant it is to the topic.

- Art

[arthra]

In view of some of our discussion here I thought this excerpt following might shed some light on the issues and offer the Baha'i perspective. So I'm quoting here from the report of the Baha'i Research Department that serves the Universal House of Justice:



The Research Department has studied the questions about various aspects of the Bahá'í Teachings raised by Mr. ... in his letter dated 27 May 1994 to the Universal House of Justice. We provide the following comment.
 
1.      New Religious Movements
 
1.1                        Station of founders
 
Mr. ... enquires about the Bahá'í perspective on such founders of religious groups and movements as the Reverend Moon (the Unification Church), Sai Baba, 'Maitreya (London)', the founder of Brahma Kumaris, Madame Blavatsky (Theosophy) and Alice Bailey (the Arcane School and the School of Esoteric Studies). He asks whether they are to be considered as false prophets or people who were influenced by the spirit released by the coming of Bahá'u'lláh and hence are fulfilling some special function like bringing more love and unity to the world.
 
As Mr. ... is, no doubt, aware, Bahá'ís do not expect the coming of a new Manifestation of God before the lapse of a thousand years. In this regard, the Universal House of Justice in a letter dated 11 May 1993 written on its behalf to a National Spiritual Assembly provided the following guidance concerning the Bahá'í view of the founder of the Sai Baba movement:
 
Bahá'ís, of course, cannot accept the claim of the founder of the movement, or his successor, that he is the equivalent of what we understand to be the Manifestation of God, even though he may have been inspired with the spirit of the age. It is clear in the Bahá'í Writings that such an august Figure is not to appear before the expiration of at least a full thousand years after the coming of Bahá'u'lláh.
 
As to the founders of the other groups, the Research Department has not been able to locate any specific references in the Bahá'í Writings to them. Mr. ... might be interested to know tat in God Passes By Shoghi Effendi indicates that the prophecy concerning 'Maitreye, the Buddha of universal fellowship' (as distinct from 'Maitreya (London)'), is a reference to Bahá'u'lláh (1). Further, when the Guardian was asked about the status of a number of different religious groups and movements, his secretary, writing on his behalf, responded:
 
Truth is found everywhere. It would be indeed difficult to find a creed or a doctrine of any sort in this world that did not possess some facet of truth; this is what Bahá'u'lláh believed and taught. But everything has a source or focal centre; the focal centres of truth are not broken up or distributed at random, but, like the sun, are concentrated in one mighty source whom we call a Prophet or Manifestation of God. What we find in each other, and in various creeds, are rays from this source — but the source is the all-important thing, and to recognize and turn to it gives one an infinitely greater degree of strength and enlightenment than to try to find its rays, one here and one there, scattered about among our fellow men.

(7 July 1942 to an individual believer)
 
Regarding Mr. ... The Guardian is not familiar with his name or his works. There are such mighty forces at large in the world today that many people, unaware of their origin and true purpose, get swept off into all kinds of ... religious convictions and start new cults and societies. Often their intention is very high, and they are intensely sincere. What they do not, of course, realize is that they have caught a ray or glimmer from the Sun of Bahá'u'lláh and not the whole truth at all, but a tiny, distorted fragment of it.

(3 August 1942 to an individual believer)
 
While we have not located any references to Madame Blavatsky, the founder of Theosophy, there are a number of statements, in letters written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, on Theosophy itself. For example:
 
The idea of Masters as expounded by the Theosophists is contrary to the Teachings. The doctrine of 'return' as set forth by Bahá'u'lláh in the Iqán is essentially different, implying no incarnation or return of the essence, but simply the return of the attributes and qualities. It is just like the return of fragrance and colour in flowers. The individuality is neither lost nor identified. It is untransferable.
 
It is therefore sheer superstition to believe that holy souls can voluntarily return to this world and serve the people.

(22 April 1939 to an individual believer)
 
Many theosophists accept Bahá'u'lláh as a Prophet, but we have no special relation to theosophy.

(4 October 1950 to an individual believer)

For the source of the above see

http://bahai-library.com/uhj/new.religions.html

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Art,


thank you for the post.

herein lies the tricky bit:

Originally Posted by Art

"....God Passes By Shoghi Effendi indicates that the prophecy concerning 'Maitreye, the Buddha of universal fellowship' (as distinct from 'Maitreya (London)'), is a reference to Bahá'u'lláh."

given all the other conditions that are in the prophecy which have not come to pass, i am utterly confused as to how any being could view themselves as Maitreya.

the Dharma is not gone and they really do mean "no longer existent in the present world system" by this statement. there is no World Ruling King in India, a Chakravantin at that, humans have more than 3 illnesses etc....

as i, hopefully, indicated before... as a matter of religious belief, if your tradition posits that Bahá'u'lláh is Maitreya, so be it. there is, however, no support for this view within the Sutras.

of course, i understand that Baha'i also believe that our scriptures have become corrupt and so forth... which is, incidently, the same claim that the Muslims make when they try to demonstrate how our prophecy applies to the Prophet (pbuh).

yet, strangely, both groups uphold our teachings when they think that our teachings indicate their religious views. it seems to be a rather contradictory position to take on the whole issue.... but, it seems to work ok for those two groups.

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Nitai,

thank you for the post.

though i agree with Art... how is this related to the topic at hand?

if you'd like to discuss Buddhism or Sanatana Dharma or the other Eastern Traditions, why, we have a whole section for that very thing

[smkolins]

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

Namaste Art,


thank you for the post.

herein lies the tricky bit:


given all the other conditions that are in the prophecy which have not come to pass, i am utterly confused as to how any being could view themselves as Maitreya.

Is it necessary that any Buddhist feel that prophecies have not come about before Maitreya appear?

[smkolins]

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

Namaste Art,

yet, strangely, both groups uphold our teachings when they think that our teachings indicate their religious views. it seems to be a rather contradictory position to take on the whole issue.... but, it seems to work ok for those two groups.

I think an indepth discussion of these prophecies completely on topic. Care to share the prophecies you feel strongly about and we can review sources for translation and reference and see what can be gained by reviewing them?

[Vajradhara]

Originally Posted by smkolins

Is it necessary that any Buddhist feel that prophecies have not come about before Maitreya appear?

Namaste smkolins,

i'm not enitrely clear on what you are asking... however, it really has nothing to do with our feelings on the issue, per se.

one of the other things that i think is happening is that most beings are not aware of what a Buddha does and how that is different from an Awakened Being and so forth.

the main consideration in this regard is that a Buddha is a being that can teach the Dharma and, in point of fact, does teach the Dharma.

thus, if the Dharma from the last Buddha is still in existence, the next Buddha will not arise in our world system. of course, if we are referring to other world systems (Buddhism posits a Billion worlds of sentient beings) there could be a Buddha arising there

[Vajradhara]

Namaste smkolins,

thank you for the post.

Originally Posted by smkolins

I think an indepth discussion of these prophecies completely on topic. Care to share the prophecies you feel strongly about and we can review sources for translation and reference and see what can be gained by reviewing them?

we've had a bit of a discussion on it here:

the Prophecy of Maitreya

[smkolins]

Quote:
Originally Posted by smkolins
Is it necessary that any Buddhist feel that prophecies have not come about before Maitreya appear?

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

Namaste smkolins,

i'm not enitrely clear on what you are asking... however, it really has nothing to do with our feelings on the issue, per se.

At the time when Dharma has failed and disappeared, would there be a person who could call themselves a Buddhist, view what they think the Dharma is in action, and be totally wrong, even though as any person, for their own reasons, feel and think they are right?

So - is it necessary that some Buddhist somewhere, sometime, feel the prophecies of the disappearence of the Dharma have not taken place and perhaps even say so right to the next Buddha's face?

Put another way, if in fact a Buddha arises that means the old Dharma is dead whatever people think of it or not. And if a new Buddha in fact arises, then whatever He teaches is in fact the Dharma, whatever other people think it to be or not to be. Yes?