Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Recommended Posts

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

Dear Friend,

I heard a lot of stories about Baha'is and excommunication. While it is true that Baha'is may be excommunicated if they try to create sects, it is a very lengthy process. As an experiment, I tried it myself. I talked to the assembly that I wanted to become an Orthodox Baha'i and they told me that it was my choice; however, I would be breaking a law of Baha'u'llah and thus, they would not talk to me. Before that though, they discussed it with me for so long before they were able to label me a covenant breaker. I told them later that I did it for the sole reason to see the implications of breaking the covenant and to verify to what extent those stories are true.

However, if someone leaves the Baha'i Faith, nothing happens. Lots of members (including some family members) left the religion. We would talk about it, for sure. That's love and care; we don't want them to go astray, but we don't push it too far. At all.

UHJ having full control?? Since when? I disagree with the entire Ruhi concept which the UHJ implemented. I think it's biased and does not put into consideration all the cultural differences among the Baha'is of the world. Many Baha'is voice their discontent with Ruhi and it's totally okay. According to the Baha'i Faith, drinking is not allowed. Many Baha'is drink. Now, when they say they want to drink, all the National Assembly (an organization under the UHJ) says "it is between them and God." 

As a matter of fact, I've never seen the Assembly controlling marriages or work or anything. Most of us marry based on our parents' approval and that is. And, we work anywhere.

Regarding the world government, I do see your point in those two quotations. However, let's examine the first quotation. Now, as I said, this unification of the world is inevitable. It is to happen. God, in the revelation of Baha'u'llah, does give and prescribe remedies to the world. However, as Baha'u'llah says in the Iqan, (I'm paraphrasing) "whoever comes forth and believes, to him is his profit, and whoever rejects, to him his rejection." So we're not controlling anything. The Baha'i Faith is the remedy; whoever takes it, takes it. Whoever doesn't, it is between him and God. Now, the remedy, according to the quote, is the unity of humanity in one Cause and one Faith. It's important to note here that "faith" is not "religion" and the "faith" Baha'u'llah talks about is the faith in humanity. No one is enforcing the faith of Baha'u'llah. It is to have faith in humanity and to be unified in one Cause: the advancement of humanity.

Regarding the second quote, it proves my point. Shoghi says "it's watchword is...," meaning the Cause is the unification of humanity, in the standard of which is "the Most Great Peace." That "Most Great Peace" era when people of all races, all religions are unified together under one world government is the Kingdom of God, the Kingdom of Baha'u'llah, because this is Baha'u'llah's vision. However that vision does not say that all people in that Kingdom are Baha'is, nor does it say that the rulers are Baha'i.

For instance, when Martin Luther King starts off his revolution to eliminate racism and when we say "Martin Luther King's dream is fulfilled." Does this mean that the black race will rule everyone? Or that the black race is the only race left? No. Similarly, the "Kingdom of Baha'u'llah" is an allusion to this era of Peace, in which all people are united, under a government the people form. 

Regarding the last quote; it is important to note that this quote comes from a different tablet to the Most Holy Book. Kitab-i-Aqdas mentions a similar quote; however, it adds upon it and it says that "whoever proclaims a message before the passing of 1000 years" is ... etc. Now, if you read the entire passage, Baha'u'llah is talking about this dispensation, which started from the Declaration of the Bab and will end 1000 years after 1844, which means that whoever (other than the Bab and Baha'u'llah) proclaims, before the passing of 1000 years, that he is a prophet, he certainly is a liar. It is important to note that all key writings of Baha'u'llah mention the coming of a new prophet. Read the Kitab-i-Iqan to see what I mean.

My brother in faith, thank you so much for bring these into attention and this is the type of conversation I would like to indulge in. I do not want to argue, just discuss. (Also, we share the same "faith," the belief in God, even if we don't share the same religion. You are my brother and so are all the rest of you.)

Hamzah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear friend,

On 1/21/2017 at 3:19 PM, Hamzah J. said:

I heard a lot of stories about Baha'is and excommunication. While it is true that Baha'is may be excommunicated if they try to create sects, it is a very lengthy process. As an experiment, I tried it myself. I talked to the assembly that I wanted to become an Orthodox Baha'i and they told me that it was my choice; however, I would be breaking a law of Baha'u'llah and thus, they would not talk to me. Before that though, they discussed it with me for so long before they were able to label me a covenant breaker. I told them later that I did it for the sole reason to see the implications of breaking the covenant and to verify to what extent those stories are true.

People are not excommunicated for simply trying to create a sect and even if they do you are still performing the crazy (as you put it) act of excommunicating them. I can post the stories of many people who were excommunicated for very trivial reasons. Traveling to Israel without Shoghi's permission, traveling to America without Shoghi's permission, stating that they were Muslim instead of Baha'i to save their lives, finding out the truth about Baha'ism and speaking about it, being a follower or supporter of Baha'u'llah's other son, Muhammad Ali etc. etc. etc.

On 1/21/2017 at 3:19 PM, Hamzah J. said:

UHJ having full control?? Since when? I disagree with the entire Ruhi concept which the UHJ implemented. I think it's biased and does not put into consideration all the cultural differences among the Baha'is of the world. Many Baha'is voice their discontent with Ruhi and it's totally okay. According to the Baha'i Faith, drinking is not allowed. Many Baha'is drink. Now, when they say they want to drink, all the National Assembly (an organization under the UHJ) says "it is between them and God." 

If the UHJ orders you to this or that you have to oblige. This is called full control. Just because the UHJ does not meddle in all your affairs, it doesn't mean you have freedom to disobey the UHJ when they give a direct order.

On 1/21/2017 at 3:19 PM, Hamzah J. said:

Regarding the world government, I do see your point in those two quotations. However, let's examine the first quotation. Now, as I said, this unification of the world is inevitable. It is to happen. God, in the revelation of Baha'u'llah, does give and prescribe remedies to the world. However, as Baha'u'llah says in the Iqan, (I'm paraphrasing) "whoever comes forth and believes, to him is his profit, and whoever rejects, to him his rejection." So we're not controlling anything. The Baha'i Faith is the remedy; whoever takes it, takes it. Whoever doesn't, it is between him and God. Now, the remedy, according to the quote, is the unity of humanity in one Cause and one Faith. It's important to note here that "faith" is not "religion" and the "faith" Baha'u'llah talks about is the faith in humanity. No one is enforcing the faith of Baha'u'llah. It is to have faith in humanity and to be unified in one Cause: the advancement of humanity.

Regarding the second quote, it proves my point. Shoghi says "it's watchword is...," meaning the Cause is the unification of humanity, in the standard of which is "the Most Great Peace." That "Most Great Peace" era when people of all races, all religions are unified together under one world government is the Kingdom of God, the Kingdom of Baha'u'llah, because this is Baha'u'llah's vision. However that vision does not say that all people in that Kingdom are Baha'is, nor does it say that the rulers are Baha'i.

IMO, You are trying to squeeze out a meaning out of those quotes that goes against it apparent and obvious meaning. For all I know according to Baha'u'llah you have to take the evident meaning of his statements and refrain from paraphrasing: "Whoso interpreteth what hath been sent down from the heaven of Revelation, and altereth its evident meaning, he, verily, is of them that have perverted the Sublime Word of God, and is of the lost ones in the Lucid Book." (Baha'u'llah, Aqdas, no. 105)

On 1/21/2017 at 3:19 PM, Hamzah J. said:

Regarding the last quote; it is important to note that this quote comes from a different tablet to the Most Holy Book. Kitab-i-Aqdas mentions a similar quote; however, it adds upon it and it says that "whoever proclaims a message before the passing of 1000 years" is ... etc. Now, if you read the entire passage, Baha'u'llah is talking about this dispensation, which started from the Declaration of the Bab and will end 1000 years after 1844, which means that whoever (other than the Bab and Baha'u'llah) proclaims, before the passing of 1000 years, that he is a prophet, he certainly is a liar. It is important to note that all key writings of Baha'u'llah mention the coming of a new prophet. Read the Kitab-i-Iqan to see what I mean.

You see this is called a contradiction. You can't claim that no Manifestations will come in the future and at the same time claim that manifestations will come after a thousand years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

No, it is not crazy. They are trying to create disunity. To keep the community united, they have to excommunicated. However, to be excommunicated, it takes a long time. Regarding Shoghi, well, you see, it was a time of war and Shoghi knows best about travel to Israel, since he remained in Israel, faithful to the holy land. It's an issue of safety. No one is forcing anyone anything. You can choose to follow Baha'u'llah's other son, but, according to mainstream belief, you will be considered a covenant breaker. It is no trivial issue (disuniting the faith).

Also, to be honest, no, the UHJ rarely does anything in the first place. I joined the Baha'i Faith for many years and I have not seen any Baha'i organization telling me what to do. I asked crazy lots of questions, really. And they answered me.

Regarding the quote in the Aqdas, it only refers to one verse in the entire Revelation, which is in regards to proclaiming prophecy before the completion of a 1000 years. Any Baha'i can interpret anything whatever way they want, as long as they don't contradict the Writings of Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi and as long as they don't impose it. The UHJ does not interpret anything, actually. It's job is to keep the Baha'i community in shape and going.

Lastly, 

On 1/21/2017 at 3:53 PM, hadez803 said:

You see this is called a contradiction. You can't claim that no Manifestations will come in the future and at the same time claim that manifestations will come after a thousand years.

I meant here that anyone who proclaims to be a Manifestation during the Baha'i dispensation is a liar; however, after a 1000 years, then there's a chance he is saying the truth. There is no contradiction.

Best,

Hamzah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2017 at 4:05 PM, Hamzah J. said:

No, it is not crazy. They are trying to create disunity. To keep the community united, they have to excommunicated. However, to be excommunicated, it takes a long time. Regarding Shoghi, well, you see, it was a time of war and Shoghi knows best about travel to Israel, since he remained in Israel, faithful to the holy land. It's an issue of safety. No one is forcing anyone anything. You can choose to follow Baha'u'llah's other son, but, according to mainstream belief, you will be considered a covenant breaker. It is no trivial issue (disuniting the faith).

It is not a matter of creating disunity. Take this poor person for example: excommunicated for stating she was a Muslim instead of Baha'i becasue she feared for her life: https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2016/04/choosing-motherhood-over-martyrdom/478641/

On 1/21/2017 at 4:05 PM, Hamzah J. said:

Also, to be honest, no, the UHJ rarely does anything in the first place. I joined the Baha'i Faith for many years and I have not seen any Baha'i organization telling me what to do. I asked crazy lots of questions, really. And they answered me.

Have you ever heard about the group of Baha'i academics running the Talisman group? threatened to be excommunicated, others disenrolled, forced to resign, or silenced... because they were exposing too many things the UHJ wanted to hide...

http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/talisman.html

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/tarc1196.htm

On 1/21/2017 at 4:05 PM, Hamzah J. said:

Regarding the quote in the Aqdas, it only refers to one verse in the entire Revelation, which is in regards to proclaiming prophecy before the completion of a 1000 years. Any Baha'i can interpret anything whatever way they want, as long as they don't contradict the Writings of Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi and as long as they don't impose it. The UHJ does not interpret anything, actually. It's job is to keep the Baha'i community in shape and going.

Read again: "Whoso interpreteth what hath been sent down from the heaven of Revelation, and altereth its evident meaning, he, verily, is of them that have perverted the Sublime Word of God, and is of the lost ones in the Lucid Book." (Baha'u'llah, Aqdas, no. 105)

On 1/21/2017 at 4:05 PM, Hamzah J. said:

I meant here that anyone who proclaims to be a Manifestation during the Baha'i dispensation is a liar; however, after a 1000 years, then there's a chance he is saying the truth. There is no contradiction.

The quote I provided clearly states all Manifestations have come to an end by the proclamation of Baha'u'llah and whoever makes a proclamation after him is a liar. He says nothing about this occuring during or after the Baha'i dispensation. He closes the probability of another Manifestation appearing once and for all... all while attacking the concept khatamiyat in Islam while he is practically making that same claim about himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Alright. So, yes, sometimes things are not fair. But that example doesn't represent what Baha'u'llah taught. We are not infallible and excommunicating her was not fair. To be honest, I don't believe the story. I'm pretty sure that if she was excommunicated, there had to be another reason.

And, why is this bothering you? Catholic excommunication happens. If you leave Islam, there is capital punishment, that is, if you are in a Muslim country. Disagreeing with the pope is a BIG thing in Catholic dogma; same here: a major infraction and deviation from the authority of the UHJ would result in excommunication. That is, saying that the UHJ has no authority; however, disagreeing with it in trivial matters such as Ruhi is OK.

Okay, so about those people. How are they silenced? All that Baha'is say is that what they are doing is wrong. Rejecting the UHJ is a deviation. Thus, Baha'is would be asked to not communicate with them. Interestingly, that is what Abdul Baha did. When people voiced against him, he just remained quiet. That is what we are doing: remaining quiet because we don't want arguments. We are not going to kill them or anything.

The other verse you quote lacks interpretation. If that is the only verse in the Baha'i literature about the coming of another Manifestation, then you'd be right. But, the overwhelming majority of Baha'i literature talks about the interpretation of "finality." It talks about the irrationality of the Christian belief that Jesus is the Son of God once and for all and no other prophet will come after Jesus. It talks about how to interpret the Qura'anic verse of the khatimiyat. And, thus, since this is a similar verse regarding "the finality of Baha'u'llah" if you wish to call it as such, then it should be interpreted in the same light in which the Islamic khatmiyyat and Christian belief is interpreted. Thus, yes, Baha'u'llah is the last, but he's also the first and there will be another. It's a vicious cycle.

Actually, have you ever read the Iqan? Because it will show you a different way to interpret all of this.

And the verse you quote, here is the explanation: (I'm sorry, I, earlier, mistake the verse you quoted with another one. What you quoted is not in reference to laying a claim before the expiration of 1000 years. (This is at the bottom)

Whoso interpreteth what hath been sent down from the heaven of Revelation, and altereth its evident meaning, he, verily, is of them that have perverted the Sublime Word of God, and is of the lost ones in the Lucid Book.
 
 
 
Whoso interpreteth what hath been sent down from the heaven of Revelation, and altereth its evident meaning
In several of His Tablets, Bahá'u'lláh affirms the distinction between allegorical verses, which are susceptible to interpretation, and those verses that relate to such subjects as the laws and ordinances, worship and religious observances, whose meanings are evident and which demand compliance on the part of the believers.
As explained in notes 145 and 184, Bahá'u'lláh designated 'Abdu'l-Bahá, His eldest Son, as His Successor and the Interpreter of His Teachings. 'Abdu'l-Bahá in His turn appointed His eldest grandson, Shoghi Effendi, to succeed Him as interpreter of the holy Writ and Guardian of the Cause. The interpretations of 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi are considered divinely guided and are binding on the Bahá'ís.
The existence of authoritative interpretations does not preclude the individual from engaging in the study of the Teachings and thereby arriving at a personal interpretation or understanding. A clear distinction is, however, drawn in the Bahá'í Writings between authoritative interpretation and the understanding that each individual arrives at from a study of its Teachings. Individual interpretations based on a person's understanding of the Teachings constitute the fruit of man's rational power and may well contribute to a greater comprehension of the Faith. Such views, nevertheless, lack authority. In presenting their personal ideas, individuals are cautioned not to discard the authority of the revealed words, not to deny or contend with the authoritative interpretation, and not to engage in controversy; rather they should offer their thoughts as a contribution to knowledge, making it clear that their views are merely their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...