Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hey, I wanted to create this thread and, as a Baha'i, I am interested in creating a HEALTHY debate about whether or not Baha'u'llah and the Bab are truly prophets. 

I would request from all those who would like to comment to not insult anyone, including Baha'u'llah, the Bab. This is meant to be a healthy conversation. 

FYI, I speak perfect Arabic so I have no problem explaining things in Arabic or verses, etc. from the Baha'i writings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam

Baha'is acknowledge Du'a Nudba as being words of Imams.

In that, it is said that Ali had the position of Aeron to Moses except there is no Prophet after him in that.

So what can that mean except there is no Prophet after Mohammad.

I think it's in kitabal itqaan that Baha'alllah quotes it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hamzah J. said:

Hey, I wanted to create this thread and, as a Baha'i, I am interested in creating a HEALTHY debate about whether or not Baha'u'llah and the Bab are truly prophets. 

I would request from all those who would like to comment to not insult anyone, including Baha'u'llah, the Bab. This is meant to be a healthy conversation. 

FYI, I speak perfect Arabic so I have no problem explaining things in Arabic or verses, etc. from the Baha'i writings. 

Not insulting you or anyone else. But no they weren't prophets 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. True, but the thing is. Daniel said in the Torah that he sealed the book and that there will be no book coming until the end of times. NIV Bible: But you, Daniel, roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge."
Jesus says he is the truth, the way and the life and NO ONE shall come to the father except through him (Jesus).

In other words, Muhammad meant something else when it was revealed that he was the seal of prophets. He sealed one cycle of prophecy and ended it. Even Imam Sadiq said that the Qaim comes with a new book:

 يقوم القائم بأمر جديد وكتاب جديد وبقضاء جديد على العرب شديد

 

In another perspective, all prophets are one and the same, meaning that the "return of Jesus" symbolically also refers to the return of Muhammad, Moses, etc, which also means that the "return of Jesus" is the coming of a NEW prophet. 

 

What do you think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find funny how Bahais insist on interpreting so many verses non-literally including the day of judgement verses making it all about the manifestation day of a Manifestation (major founding Prophet), yet hadiths talking about a new book cannot be seen as exaggerated pose about the interpretation of Quran being so different than what people are taught and that the knowledge of the book will reach new heights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The verse regarding Daniel is 12:4 of the Christian Bible.

Regarding the hadith, this is the Sanad: وأخبرنا علي بن الحسين بإسناده عن أحمد بن محمد بن أبى نصر، عن عاصم ابن حميد الحناط، عن أبي بصير قال: قال أبو جعفر (عليه السلام): " يقوم القائم بأمر جديد، وكتاب جديد، وقضاء جديد ، على العرب شديد، ليس شأنه إلا السيف، لا يستتيب أحدا، ولا يأخذه في الله لومة لائم ". 
 

If you want the exact sources from Shi'i books, I am not sure as I currently am traveling and do not have my books with me. Any Google search and you will see how often it is repeated in Shi'i websites, despite its interpretation being different. 

 

As for you, LinkZelda, Baha'is don't cherry pick what is literal and what is metaphorical. You could try reading this: http://bahaiteachings.org/decoding-prophetic-code-one-bahai-example#

 

I really want to know your opinions. I want to engage in a proper "investigation of truth".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P.S. prophets are alpha and omega, first and last. Finality of prophethood also means beginning of a new prophethood, if you get what I mean. They are one and the same. 

 

Another thing is that Muhammad is khatam al-nabiyyin, the last who prophecies OF judgement day. He's the last "prophet" who gives the "naba'," the great news and tidings of the coming of the new cycle, the day of judgment and the day when a new age will usher. He is however, not the final "resool," meaning that there will be further apostles and messengers coming. 

 

I understand the common Islamic argument that every nabi is a rasool; however, we reject that. We look the Arabic word, from the origin. Where in the Quran does it say that every nabi is a resool? In other words, they are two distinct concepts. However, the logical answer is that a nabi HAS to also be a resool, because he prophecies. However, that does not mean that there can be a nabi without being a rasool. Khidr for examples prophesied and was very wise, but he didn't preach; he could have been a nabi, but not a rasool. Baha'u'llah is a resool, but not a nabi; he doesn't have to prophecy anymore if he is the prophecy in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well any true investigation of truth is always welcome if when the truth becomes evident the person accepts it and does not run away from acceptance.

Rejecting the Islamic belief of Khatamiyat is very important for the Baha'i cult as the foundation of this cult is based on the rejection of this truth.

Mr.Hamza should reply to the following:
What is the reason for considering the Bab and Baha as prophets on the basis of his argument while at the same time rejecting Mirza Gulam Ahmed Qadiani and many others who have claimed to be Prophets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Holy Quran clearly declares:
“Mohammed (pbuh) is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Messenger of Allah and the seal (last) of the Prophets. And God is Aware of everything.”
(Ref: The Chapter of Ahzab, verse 40)

The above verse unequivocally announces the end of divine prophethood and messengership.

The Prophet of Allah (pbuh) affirmed: “The chain of Messengers and Prophets has come to an end. There shall be no Messenger nor Prophet after me.”
(Ref: Tirmidhi, Kitab-ur-Rouya Babu Zahab-un- Nubuwwa, Musnad Ahmad, Marwiyat-Anas bin Malik)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam! 

Please do not call the Baha'i Faith a cult, because it is not. Regardless, we do accept that Khatimiyyat of Risalah, but not Nubuwwa. We simply interpret differently. And, why do we reject Mirza Ghulam Ahmed? Because a prophet is measured by his or her fruits. What benefit has Ghulam Ahmed brought to humanity? What benefit has he brought by saying that Jesus went to Kashmir? Nothing. Utterly nothing. The Baha'i Faith's emphasis on unity is the fruit of the religion. His calls to the world leaders to unite before the world wars is a call for unity. And, now... look at this! We live in shame as we haven't answered the calls of God himself. (I am not saying Baha'u'llah is God, but his message is from God."

 

Able Faadhil, you mention a hadith. I told you my interpretation. But, let me ask you, how about the hadith of Imam Sadiq? The hadith that the Mahdi comes with a new book, and a new law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interpretation of Quran can only come from ahlul bait and no other source. We cannot simply interject our own interpretations into Quran. Ahlul bait have been clear on Rasoulallah being the final prophet and that no prophet will be after him. 

The following 3 Hadith explain the importance of imamat and the number of imams and that immamat continues till the judgement day.

Importance of knowing imam of our time

After Rasoullah, there are the 12 infallible imams as authority of Allah upon us, and this will continue till judgment day.

‘One who dies without recognising the Imam of his time dies the death of ignorance.

There are only 12 imams, not 1 more or less

[...] and Abdul Aziz narrated, that Abu Abdullah (a.) has said: "The Imams after the Messenger of Allah (s.) are Twelve, who are excellent and explaining, whoever reduces them by one, or adds one to them, has left the religion of Allah, and he has nothing to do with our Wilayah."

Shia References.

Source: Mustadrak al-Wasā’il by Ṭabarsī - Ḥusayn al-Nūrī, Volume 18, page 177, Hadith # 16

 

Imammat is continuous and till the day of judgement.

 Narrated to us my father; and Muhammad bin Hasan - may Allah be pleased with them - they said: Narrated to us Saad bin Abdullah that: Narrated to us Muhammad bin Isa bin Ubaid; and Muhammad bin Husain bin Abil Khattab from Muhammad bin Fudail from Abi Hamza Thumali from Abi Abdullah (a.s.) that he asked him:

“Can the earth remain without an Imam?” He replied: “If the earth is without an Imam for a moment, it will indeed sink into itself.”

http://www.al-islam.org/kamaaluddin-wa-tamaamun-nima-vol-1-shaykh-saduq/chapter-21-necessity-imam-every-age

 

As you can see, there is no room here for additional imam or new prophets after Rasoullah.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The role of infallible imam as successor of Rasoullah is to continue, expand and implement the existing religion and not to modify or bring new Quran. The hadith from imam Sadiq bringing new book is simply invalid. Imam Sadiq has said that imam mahdi will be brining back islam in full. It will be as though it's a new religion for people as they have been distant from it. 

Muhammad Ibn Ijlan narrated:
Imam al-Sadiq (AS) said, "When our Qa'im rises he shall call people anew to Islam and shall guide them to the things that were annihilated and from which people had turned away. He is called Mahdi because he will guide people to the thing from which they have been separated. He is called al-Qa'im because of his rise for the truth."

" al-Irshad, v2, p383; Bihar al-Anwar, v51, p30, Hadith 7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/20/2016 at 9:31 AM, Hamzah J. said:

The verse regarding Daniel is 12:4 of the Christian Bible.

Regarding the hadith, this is the Sanad: وأخبرنا علي بن الحسين بإسناده عن أحمد بن محمد بن أبى نصر، عن عاصم ابن حميد الحناط، عن أبي بصير قال: قال أبو جعفر (عليه السلام): " يقوم القائم بأمر جديد، وكتاب جديد، وقضاء جديد ، على العرب شديد، ليس شأنه إلا السيف، لا يستتيب أحدا، ولا يأخذه في الله لومة لائم ". 
 

If you want the exact sources from Shi'i books, I am not sure as I currently am traveling and do not have my books with me. Any Google search and you will see how often it is repeated in Shi'i websites, despite its interpretation being different. 

So is your argument that every prophet is the seal of his time, until a new prophet is needed? From an Islamic perspective, there is no proof for that. Prophet Muhammad (s) was the only one called the Seal of Prophets in the Quran and hadith. Daniel 12:4, which as you know is not binding for Muslims, does not say that Daniel will be the last prophet of any cycle - his instruction to "seal the book" is not the sealing of prophethood or revelation altogether, nor is there any indication of that in the text. As for Jesus being the way, the truth, and the life, this is because he is the hujja of his time, whose recognition is obligatory and who is the key to salvation for everyone in his time period. We believe there is always a hujja, and that hujja does not need to be a prophet. The hujja of our time is the 12th Imam, and we have no reason to believe that he died for a new person (Baha'ullah or otherwise) to take his place.

As for the hadith you have posted about the Qa'im coming with a new book, there are weaknesses in its chain (Muhammad b. Hassaan ar-Razi is majhool, and Muhammad b. `Ali al-Kufi is disagreed upon). There are no strong hadiths about the Qa'im coming with a new book, only that he would come with Imam `Ali's codex of the Quran.

There are many reliable hadiths on the sealing of prophethood. The Prophet famously said to Ali, "You are to me as Aaron was to Moses, except there will be no prophet after me."

In this sahih hadith, Imam Musa al-Kadhim says, "There is no prophet after our Prophet." (محمد بن يحيى، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن محمد بن إسماعيل، عن عمه حمزة بن بزيع، عن علي السائي عن أبي الحسن الاول موسى عليه السلام قال: قال: مبلغ علمنا على ثلاثة وجوه: ماض وغابر وحادث فاما الماضي فمفسر، وأما الغابر فمزبوروأما الحادث فقذف في القلوب، ونقر في الاسماع وهو أفضل علمنا ولا نبي بعد نبينا.)

In another sahih hadith, Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq says, " Allah عز ذكره sealed the prophets with your Prophet, and there will never be a prophet after him; and with your Book, He sealed the scriptures, and there will never be a scripture after it. In it, He has placed clarifications for all things – [such as] your creation, the creation of the heavens and the Earth, the information of what came before you, the disputes between you, the news of what will occur after you, the affair of Paradise and the Fire, and that to which you proceed." (محمد بن يحيى الاشعري، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن البرقي، عن النضر بن سويد عن يحيى بن عمران الحلبي، عن أيوب بن الحر، قال: سمعت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام يقول: إن الله عز ذكره ختم بنبيكم النبيين فلا نبي بعده أبدا، وختم بكتابكم الكتب فلا كتاب بعده أبدا، وأنزل فيه تبيان كل شئ وخلقكم وخلق السماوات والارض ونبأ ما قبلكم وفصل ما بينكم وخبر ما بعدكم وأمر الجنة والنار وما أنتم صائرون إليه.)

He also says in this hasan hadith, "To find the lawful, we are referred to. However, attributing prophethood to us is invalid" (علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن الحسين بن أبي العلاء قال: قال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام: إنما الوقوف علينا في الحلال فأما النبوة فلا.)

We are awaiting the Mahdi, who is not a prophet, but a ruler who will bring justice and peace to a world fraught with injustice and oppression. That hasn't happened yet. If one takes a holistic look at our scriptures, he will not possibly be able to interpret them to mean that the 12th Imam would not come, and instead another prophet and book would come. "Out of tens of thousands of narrations, none say that we should expect a new prophet. If anything, we have narrations on expecting false prophets.

12 hours ago, Hamzah J. said:

The Baha'i Faith's emphasis on unity is the fruit of the religion. His calls to the world leaders to unite before the world wars is a call for unity. And, now... look at this! We live in shame as we haven't answered the calls of God himself.

Every leader who has ever come wanted the people to be united ... under their leadership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Hamzah J. said:

Salam! 

Please do not call the Baha'i Faith a cult, because it is not. Regardless, we do accept that Khatimiyyat of Risalah, but not Nubuwwa. We simply interpret differently. And, why do we reject Mirza Ghulam Ahmed? Because a prophet is measured by his or her fruits. What benefit has Ghulam Ahmed brought to humanity? What benefit has he brought by saying that Jesus went to Kashmir? Nothing. Utterly nothing. The Baha'i Faith's emphasis on unity is the fruit of the religion. His calls to the world leaders to unite before the world wars is a call for unity. And, now... look at this! We live in shame as we haven't answered the calls of God himself. (I am not saying Baha'u'llah is God, but his message is from God."

 

Able Faadhil, you mention a hadith. I told you my interpretation. But, let me ask you, how about the hadith of Imam Sadiq? The hadith that the Mahdi comes with a new book, and a new law?

If you say that a Prophet is measured by his fruits then you should reject the Prophethood of Prophet [Edited Out]h(as) as he had to live in Taqaiyyah and he was thus unable to contribute anything.

There is a tradition in Tafseer Al Mizan V.3 p. 208 from Imam Sadiq(as):
 "When Adam and his good children died, his successor, [Edited Out]h, was unable to expound the religion of Allah which was followed by Adam and his good children. It was so because Qabil had threatened to kill him as had killed his brother, Habil, Therefore, [Edited Out]h lived among them in fear, keeping his religion secret."

So now you either bring a better reason to reject the Qadianis or reject the Prophethood of Prophet [Edited Out]h(as).

As far as the your claim to unity is concerned it is not unique to the Baha'i cult and provides no value addition to humanity as it was propagated by the Holy Qur'an in its verses. For example;

يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَٰكُم مِّن ذَكَرٍ وَأُنثَىٰ وَجَعَلْنَٰكُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَآئِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوٓا۟ ۚ إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِندَ ٱللَّهِ أَتْقَىٰكُمْ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ خَبِيرٌ
O mankind! Indeed, We created you from a male and a female, and made you nations and tribes that you may identify yourselves with one another. Indeed the noblest of you in the sight of Allah is the most Godwary among you. Indeed Allah is all-knowing, all-aware.

Also the verse:

وَاعْتَصِمُوا بِحَبْلِ اللَّهِ جَمِيعًا وَلَا تَفَرَّقُوا ۚ 

And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided.

Not only the Holy Qur'an but men of wisdom have also talked about it.

Before Bahaullah, Saadi has talked about it in the following words:
"Human beings are members of a whole in creation of one essence and soul
If one member is afflicted with pain
Other members uneasy will remain."

Abdul Baha himself acknowledges the contribution of the past prophets in this regard:

"All Divine Prophets struggled for the Oneness of Humanity and served humanity, for the foundation of the divine teachings is the Oneness of Humanity. Moses served the Oneness of Humanity, Jesus established the Oneness of Humanity, Mohammad declared the Oneness of Humanity. The Bible, Torah, and Quran established the foundation of the Oneness of Humanity." 
(Abdul Baha, Khatabat (Egypt), vol. 1, pp. 18–19)

He is clearly confessing that this teaching is not new.

The teaching of unity of mankind is jettisoned by Baha'is when dealing with their detractors and their short history has enough examples to prove this.

They only excessively harp on oppression over them but turn a blind eye on the oppression on the Muslims by their Zionist masters and never utter a word against them. Inspite of this hypocrisy, they claim to be Harbingers of unity!!!


By the way after the claims of Bab and Baha wars and killings in this world have increased manifold.

As for the whimsical interpretation of Nabi and Rasul.
On p.210 of the same book Tafsir al Mizan there is another tradition which clarifies the matter.

“There is a tradition narrated by 'Utbah al‑Laythi from Abu Dharr (May Allah have mercy on him) that he said: I said: 'O Messenger of Allah! How many prophets(Anbiya) were there?' The Prophet said: 'One hundred and twenty‑four thousand.' I said: 'How many of them were apostles(Resool) He said: 'Three hundred and thirteen, a large crowd!‘”

This clarifies that  a Resool is a part of Anbiya. And when the chain of Anbiya ends automatically the chain of Resool ends.

Also why this whimsical interpretation has not been presented by any Muslim in their long history? And only when on the bidding of the Russians Bab and Baha have tried to spread mischief in Shiite Iran, have the over enthusiastic followers presented this unique self interpretation to somehow be able to gain some credibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Hamzah J. said:

Salam! 

Please do not call the Baha'i Faith a cult, because it is not. Regardless, we do accept that Khatimiyyat of Risalah, but not Nubuwwa. We simply interpret differently. And, why do we reject Mirza Ghulam Ahmed? Because a prophet is measured by his or her fruits. What benefit has Ghulam Ahmed brought to humanity? What benefit has he brought by saying that Jesus went to Kashmir? Nothing. Utterly nothing. The Baha'i Faith's emphasis on unity is the fruit of the religion. His calls to the world leaders to unite before the world wars is a call for unity. And, now... look at this! We live in shame as we haven't answered the calls of God himself. (I am not saying Baha'u'llah is God, but his message is from God."

 

Able Faadhil, you mention a hadith. I told you my interpretation. But, let me ask you, how about the hadith of Imam Sadiq? The hadith that the Mahdi comes with a new book, and a new law?

If you say that a Prophet is measured by his fruits then you should reject the Prophethood of Prophet Shees (as) as he had to live in Taqaiyyah and he was thus unable to contribute anything.

There is a tradition in Tafseer Al Mizan V.3 p. 208 from Imam Sadiq(as):
 "When Adam and his good children died, his successor, Shees, was unable to expound the religion of Allah which was followed by Adam and his good children. It was so because Qabil had threatened to kill him as had killed his brother, Habil, Therefore, Shees lived among them in fear, keeping his religion secret."

So now you either bring a better reason to reject the Qadianis or reject the Prophethood of Prophet Shees (as).

As far as the your claim to unity is concerned it is not unique to the Baha'i cult and provides no value addition to humanity as it was propagated by the Holy Qur'an in its verses. For example;

يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَٰكُم مِّن ذَكَرٍ وَأُنثَىٰ وَجَعَلْنَٰكُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَآئِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوٓا۟ ۚ إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِندَ ٱللَّهِ أَتْقَىٰكُمْ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ خَبِيرٌ
O mankind! Indeed, We created you from a male and a female, and made you nations and tribes that you may identify yourselves with one another. Indeed the noblest of you in the sight of Allah is the most Godwary among you. Indeed Allah is all-knowing, all-aware.

Also the verse:

وَاعْتَصِمُوا بِحَبْلِ اللَّهِ جَمِيعًا وَلَا تَفَرَّقُوا ۚ 

And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided.

Not only the Holy Qur'an but men of wisdom have also talked about it.

Before Bahaullah, Saadi has talked about it in the following words:
"Human beings are members of a whole in creation of one essence and soul
If one member is afflicted with pain
Other members uneasy will remain."

Abdul Baha himself acknowledges the contribution of the past prophets in this regard:

"All Divine Prophets struggled for the Oneness of Humanity and served humanity, for the foundation of the divine teachings is the Oneness of Humanity. Moses served the Oneness of Humanity, Jesus established the Oneness of Humanity, Mohammad declared the Oneness of Humanity. The Bible, Torah, and Quran established the foundation of the Oneness of Humanity." 
(Abdul Baha, Khatabat (Egypt), vol. 1, pp. 18–19)

He is clearly confessing that this teaching is not new.

The teaching of unity of mankind is jettisoned by Baha'is when dealing with their detractors and their short history has enough examples to prove this.

They only excessively harp on oppression over them but turn a blind eye on the oppression on the Muslims by their Zionist masters and never utter a word against them. Inspite of this hypocrisy, they claim to be Harbingers of unity!!!


By the way after the claims of Bab and Baha wars and killings in this world have increased manifold.

As for the whimsical interpretation of Nabi and Rasul.
On p.210 of the same book Tafsir al Mizan there is another tradition which clarifies the matter.

“There is a tradition narrated by 'Utbah al‑Laythi from Abu Dharr (May Allah have mercy on him) that he said: I said: 'O Messenger of Allah! How many prophets (Anbiya) were there?' The Prophet said: 'One hundred and twenty‑four thousand.' I said: 'How many of them were apostles (Resool) He said: 'Three hundred and thirteen, a large crowd!‘”

This clarifies that a Resool is a part of Anbiya. And when the chain of Anbiya ends automatically the chain of Resool ends.

Also why this whimsical interpretation has not been presented by any Muslim in their long history? And only when on the bidding of the Russians Bab and Baha have tried to spread mischief in Shiite Iran, have the over enthusiastic followers presented this unique self-interpretation to somehow be able to gain some credibility.

As for the one single tradition about the new book and law which you have been harping on. Definitely you have seen it's explanation that it refers to the Quran collected by Ameerul Momeneen Ali (as) and a legal system based on the knowledge of the Holy Prophet(Sawa) of which Hazrat Mahdi(may his reappearance be hastened) is the sole inheritor and the majority of the Muslims have been deprived of it.

But inspite of your claim of being an independent researcher you have brushed aside these and choose to interpret in a way beneficial to your misguided ideology and cult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey everyone.

 

I am so sorry for this late reply; I had to go back to the Emirates where ShiaChat is unfortunately blocked and censored.

 

Going back, I think that before I talk more about Baha'is and Shi'as, can you guys help me in understanding Shia Islam first? When I became a Baha'i I didn't consider all it's origins. I'm not saying Baha'is or Shi'as are right or wrong, but just as many of you made wrong claims about Baha'is, I think I have made claims about Shi'a beliefs from a very Baha'i perspective. 

 

In other words, I want to learn about Shi'a Islam from a Shi'a perspective. Anyone for help in where to start?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Hamzah J. said:

In other words, I want to learn about Shi'a Islam from a Shi'a perspective. Anyone for help in where to start?

A good source is

http://www.al-islam.org 

There are many good introductory books, ask if you would like any recommendations. If you have any questions on anything , there are good people here on SC who can answer them too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Can you please elaborate on what wrong claims were made about Baha'is?

As for the question in this discussion which you had raised previously about Bab and Baha truly being Prophets or not, you have not concluded it.

Perhaps your inability to answer has made you to change the discussion.

Even if you want to discuss Shia belief, let's discuss Khatemiyat as it is one of the core Shia beliefs.

 

Edited by farhana.jaffer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya. We are not zionists. 

 

I wasn't unable to answer the questions. I did, earlier, but you guys keep asking the same questions, so if you wanted me to answer anything, tell me exactly what questions there are and I'll give you a response from a Baha'i perspective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Hamzah,

I am not able to find your answers/comments to a few questions posted by the group members. To refresh your memory and to save you from the trouble of going through all the posts, given below are the unanswered queries


1) If Mirza Gulam Ahmed Qadiani did not play an active role then what about the role of Hazrat Shees (as) who was not able to contribute anything. Will you reject him as well and rejecting him is rejecting Quran?

2) You say that Bahaullah came for unity but this isnt something new. And since his coming the disunity in the world has increased, does that mean he has failed in his mission?

3) Your question about Khatemiyat was answered by Shiawarrior313 and your silence seems to have approved his point

4) Why your whimsical interpretation about Rasool and Nabi not been presented by any Muslim in their long history?

5) Your silence on the false tradition quoted by you regarding Imam Mahdi (atfs) bringing a new book also confirms your inadequate knowledge is inspired by the Baha'i cult

Kindly share your views on the above queries with appropriate and authentic books. Thank you


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) First of all, I do not know much about Seth. However, if he did have to hide his religion, that doesn't mean he did not have any good fruits. Of course, he had to have a few followers, even if it was in secret. And, the fruits don't have to show during his only life time. They could be after his death. We remember him now for his fruits as a prophet. However, Mirza Ghulam was a different story. If the root is wrong, then everything is wrong. They accept a Sunni approach to the successor of Muhammad, which already is a deviation. We Baha'is accept the Shi'a approach. Secondly, just look at the Ahmedi sect. I'm not saying they are wrong, but just look at their practices! Ex communication, full control of members, etc. It is crazy. You know we Baha'is don't have this. Yes, we do ex communicate people who deviate from the covenant, but not people who leave. My brother left the Faith with no problem at all.

2) Baha'u'llah's purpose was not unity, really. Unity of mankind is an inevitable process. Baha'u'llah came as a mubashir and a nadhir, a warner of a proclaimer of happy tidings to all. Unity was the bishara; however, we need to do it right and this is what we warned. Of course, Baha'is won't be controlling the world when unity occurs; simply, we might offer suggestions from our holy writings to improve the united system.

3) Regarding the Khadtmeiyat; first of all, the Qur'an is the most important text in Islam. What I mentioned earlier about nabi and rasul could be irrelevant, since it is only a Baha'i response, but Baha'u'llah never mentioned it; in fact, Baha'u'llah says that Muhammad sealed the prophethood and the messenger-ship. However, Baha'u'llah did say, and I believe I have mentioned this earlier, that a prophet is the beginning and the last. The Qur'an says this, too. Adam was the first, but he was also the last.  Muhammad was the last but also the first. There is no beginning, no last. Baha'u'llah is Jesus, is Muhammad, is Adam. This a cycle never ending. A circle has no beginning and no end. 

 

4) Because Baha'is made it up to justify their claims. It's not accurate, since Baha'u'llah does not mention it.

 

5) Regarding the Mahdi, what do you think? Come on guys. If you blame me for misinterpreting something clear, then the Hadith I mentioned to you is as clear as the sun. what do you think "book" means. A "new" book? Clearly, a new revelation. A new "amr"? It's so clear. Now, I know what will you next. Why is it that sometimes you say something is metaphorical and sometimes say its literal. Here's an explanation: http://bahaiteachings.org/decoding-prophetic-code-one-bahai-example.

 

Thank you.

 

PS: please, if we were to have a proper conversation, don't call the Baha'i Faith a cult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Friend allow me to clarify some points:

On 1/20/2017 at 2:29 PM, Hamzah J. said:

Secondly, just look at the Ahmedi sect. I'm not saying they are wrong, but just look at their practices! Ex communication, full control of members, etc. It is crazy. You know we Baha'is don't have this. Yes, we do ex communicate people who deviate from the covenant, but not people who leave. My brother left the Faith with no problem at all.

Baha'is excommunicate their members for very trivial reasons such as disobeying the UHJ (Universal House of Justice) or questioning it. So for whatever reason that you excommunicate people you have the same "crazy" law as the Ahmadis. Baha'is also have full control of the members: The UHJ has every right under Baha'i law to prevent you to marry someone, live somewhere, work somewhere, etc...

 

On 1/20/2017 at 2:29 PM, Hamzah J. said:

2) Baha'u'llah's purpose was not unity, really. Unity of mankind is an inevitable process. Baha'u'llah came as a mubashir and a nadhir, a warner of a proclaimer of happy tidings to all. Unity was the bishara; however, we need to do it right and this is what we warned. Of course, Baha'is won't be controlling the world when unity occurs; simply, we might offer suggestions from our holy writings to improve the united system.

Actually, you are stating the exact opposite of Baha'i beliefs. Baha'is strive to bring a day where everyone will become Baha'i and the world will be ruled by Baha'is:

"That which the Lord hath ordained as the sovereign remedy and mightiest instrument for the healing of all the world is the union of all its peoples in one universal Cause, one common Faith." (Baha'u'llah, Gleanings From the Writings of Baha'u'llah, section CXX.)

“Its watchword is the unification of the human race; its standard the “Most Great Peace”; its consummation the advent of that golden millennium—the Day when the kingdoms of this world shall have become the Kingdom of God Himself, the Kingdom of Baha’u’llah,” (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha’u’llah, p. 157)

On 1/20/2017 at 2:29 PM, Hamzah J. said:

3) Regarding the Khadtmeiyat; first of all, the Qur'an is the most important text in Islam. What I mentioned earlier about nabi and rasul could be irrelevant, since it is only a Baha'i response, but Baha'u'llah never mentioned it; in fact, Baha'u'llah says that Muhammad sealed the prophethood and the messenger-ship. However, Baha'u'llah did say, and I believe I have mentioned this earlier, that a prophet is the beginning and the last. The Qur'an says this, too. Adam was the first, but he was also the last.  Muhammad was the last but also the first. There is no beginning, no last. Baha'u'llah is Jesus, is Muhammad, is Adam. This a cycle never ending. A circle has no beginning and no end. 

In Islamic scripture, Khatamiyat means the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the last Prophet and there will be no Prophets after him. This meaning makes your explanations unacceptable and irrelevant. Even Baha'u'llah knew this and he had to come up with a new concept so he claimed he was not a Prophet but a "Manifestations of God" (pure heresy according to Islamic beliefs). But he messed up very bad after this because he went on to claim that he was the last Manifestation and that there would be no manifestations after him:

“I swear by my True Self, all manifestations have come to an end by this Most Great Manifestation (meaning Baha’ism). Whoever claims (to be a manifestation) after that is a slandering  liar,” Bahā’u’llāh, Iqtidārāt wa chand lauḥ dīgar, p. 327.

«و نفسی الحق قد انتهت الظهورات الی هذا الظهور الاعظم و من یدعی بعده انه کذاب مفتر»: بهاءالله، اقتدارات و چند لوح دیگر، ص 327

This last statement creates multiple dilemmas for Baha'is...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×