Are Baha'is allowed to debate with Covenant-Breakers???
Are Baha'is allowed to debate with Covenant-Breakers???
Are Baha'is allowed to speak with and discuss views with Orthodox Baha'is?
And, if not, how is this relate to the Independent Investigation of Truth?
And, if not, how is this relate to the Independent Investigation of Truth?
Dearest Darrick,
Apparently "anyone" who disagrees with any thought offered by the Baha'i Administration is considered a "covenant breaker", even if they have not been declared one by the same Baha'i Administration.
What is even more ridiculous, you can even disagree with "all" of the claims of Covenant Breakers and still be suspected of being one yourself.
What a farce!
Expression of individual thoughts = Covenant Breaker?
Instead of embracing diversity of thought and getting real about the "oneness of humanity", this pre-occupation with suspecting any independet thinker to be a Covenant Breaker is forcing a cult-like Jim Jones mentality on the Faith, driving all independent thinking and independent investigation of the truth out of the Faith.
Certainly, if this continues, we will truly witness the "ebbing" of the presence of Baha'u'llah. Baha'u'llah certainly deserves better than this, so it is truly a very sad situation.
With loving Baha'i regards
Apparently "anyone" who disagrees with any thought offered by the Baha'i Administration is considered a "covenant breaker", even if they have not been declared one by the same Baha'i Administration.
What is even more ridiculous, you can even disagree with "all" of the claims of Covenant Breakers and still be suspected of being one yourself.
What a farce!
Expression of individual thoughts = Covenant Breaker?
Instead of embracing diversity of thought and getting real about the "oneness of humanity", this pre-occupation with suspecting any independet thinker to be a Covenant Breaker is forcing a cult-like Jim Jones mentality on the Faith, driving all independent thinking and independent investigation of the truth out of the Faith.
Certainly, if this continues, we will truly witness the "ebbing" of the presence of Baha'u'llah. Baha'u'llah certainly deserves better than this, so it is truly a very sad situation.
With loving Baha'i regards
Darrick, you ask: "Are Baha'is allowed to debate with Covenant-Breakers?". Well, what would be the point of debating with Covenant-Breakers? The Baha'i Faith cannot progress unless Baha'is are united, and Baha'i unity is impossible without adherence to the Covenant http://bahai.org/dir/administration/covenant. The Baha'i Covenant also covers both national and local Baha'i administrations, and no sects such as "Official Baha'is" are recognised within the Baha'i Faith. You might claim that "Official Baha'is" is not a sect but a "School of Thought", but it really amounts to the same thing if it challenges the Covenant in any way. Freedom of thought within the Covenant and spirit of the Faith is actively encouraged - after all it is the result of the God-given creative spark within every one of us - but such freedom of thought is necessarily an individual and diverse thing, not to be formalised in a "School of Thought". So, briefly, debate with Covenant-Breakers is pointless, since they don't recognise the first premise for debate: the need to maintain the Baha'i unity and cordiality which has no foundation apart from the Covenant. Consequently, the exercise would be at best a waste of time and at worst positively harmful, since there is always the chance of adverse influence. No doubt this is why we have been told to entirely shun Covenant-Breakers. I suppose the word "entirely" would include debating with them. Also, I think this ruling is probably for the benefit of Covenant-Breakers as much as for Baha'is. No longer able to feed on the love and familiarity of friends in the Baha'i Community, there's always the chance that some might repent in isolation, and regain their Covenant with God.
Dearest Tony,
You wrote:
This contradictory impulse: shunning loved ones who disagree with you, and embracing the diversity of mankind, is keeping the Baha'i Faith from evolving into a meta-religion that "all" sincere spiritually-oriented people in the world can embrace.
You must "shun" this "shunning impulse" or die as a Faith. It really is that simple.
No one who loves God and who knows she is to love everyone, even her enemies, can possibly embrace a Faith that holds shunning of those who disagree with you as legitimate.
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
...No longer able to feed on the love and familiarity of friends in the Baha'i Community, there's always the chance that some might repent in isolation, and regain their Covenant with God.
This contradictory impulse: shunning loved ones who disagree with you, and embracing the diversity of mankind, is keeping the Baha'i Faith from evolving into a meta-religion that "all" sincere spiritually-oriented people in the world can embrace.
You must "shun" this "shunning impulse" or die as a Faith. It really is that simple.
No one who loves God and who knows she is to love everyone, even her enemies, can possibly embrace a Faith that holds shunning of those who disagree with you as legitimate.
With loving Baha'i regards
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
Tony wrote:Freedom of thought within the Covenant and spirit of the Faith is actively encouraged - after all it is the result of the God-given creative spark within every one of us - but such freedom of thought is necessarily an individual and diverse thing, not to be formalised in a "School of Thought".
exactly
the term "independent thinker" in a Baha'i context, is, in my opinion, hogwash. well, you can be an “independent thinker,” but most Baha’is who call themselves “independent thinkers” have perverted its meaning. you've got the laws, so if you are a real Baha'i you will follow them. If you are a Baha'i, you will believe in the Covenant and not try to say, "Well, I agree with everything Baha'u'llah said, but something tells me He did not intend on passing the Covenant down to His Son, etc. etc." Not everything has to be analyzed to death. Maybe that's not a "P.C." thing for me to say, or even "scholarly" (I don't care, though, because I'm not a scholar). Sure, we can go back and try to figure out where Baha'u'llah gave 'Abdu'l-Baha this authority, but after substantial evidence is given and you are still not "convinced," then what happened to faith? i.e. having Faith that the Covenant is with the UHJ? Again, it is my opinion that even if people that bring up these issues are not Covenant breakers themselves (or we don't know they are), it probably is best not to respond to them—though I did in the last thread (which was a mistake)—because the only thing it can lead to is disunity, and most of the time it is like you are talking to a wall, because the other person is so hellbent on his view that he is not open to any new ideas (though he may claim he is).
so it is not wrong for you to ignore a person if you believe that the issues he is bringing up is undermining this authority. and so that is my opinion, and that’s some “independent thinking” for you!
![wink :wink:](/web/20210423051317im_/https://bahai-library.com/forum/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
—Warrior
Dearest Baha'i Warrior,
You wrote:
I thought "truth" was the foundation of all of the other virtues of God, not unity. If one is united in something false, how can you learn of such falsity unless you engage with those who make you analyze a little further and think a little deeper about what the truth really is?
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
Again, it is my opinion that even if people that bring up these issues are not Covenant breakers themselves (or we don't know they are), it probably is best not to respond to them—though I did in the last thread (which was a mistake)—because the only thing it can lead to is disunity
I thought "truth" was the foundation of all of the other virtues of God, not unity. If one is united in something false, how can you learn of such falsity unless you engage with those who make you analyze a little further and think a little deeper about what the truth really is?
With loving Baha'i regards
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
Dearest Baha'i Warrior,
You wrote:
The reason I end my correspondence with love is that I love you Baha'i Warrior, more than you love yourself.
I genuinely care what happens to your soul when you turn away from the truth of God's Word and follow a false unity created by men who are only men.
Unlike you, it bothers me not in the slightest bit if you disagree with me, or even if you disagree vehemently, because I know that the same God in me is the same God in you, and I must always honor that, despite our differences.
This is the way God has taught me to behave toward my brother through all of His wondrous Manifestations, so how else can I conclude my thoughts than with expressions of love?
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
now isn't that impious, saying something like that and ending with a feigned "With loving Baha'i regards."
The reason I end my correspondence with love is that I love you Baha'i Warrior, more than you love yourself.
I genuinely care what happens to your soul when you turn away from the truth of God's Word and follow a false unity created by men who are only men.
Unlike you, it bothers me not in the slightest bit if you disagree with me, or even if you disagree vehemently, because I know that the same God in me is the same God in you, and I must always honor that, despite our differences.
This is the way God has taught me to behave toward my brother through all of His wondrous Manifestations, so how else can I conclude my thoughts than with expressions of love?
With loving Baha'i regards
Independent Investigation of Truth in terms of investigation of the validity of the faith, comes BEFORE one becomes a Baha'i. when you BECOME one, that is, you officiall enroll, you are thus committing that you adhere to the Administrative Order as is, that it is Divinely Ordained. to question would be a lack of faith, and declaration of adherance was done without comprehensive investigation and wholeheartedness.
the problem is their influence on even the sharpest minds.
i remember this quote that was always taught to me growing up in Bahai school as a child.
it had to do with rotten apples.
you can have a whole batch of perfectly good apples, but all it takes is ONE rotten apple to ruin the whole bunch. thats why you need to distance the rotten apple from the healthy ones.
if the Divinely Ordained Universal House of Justice, under Divine Inspiration, declares one a Covenant Breaker, or any other party given such authority pertaining thereto, then they are as such. if one questions that then they are questioning the UHJ, so where is the faith? why not just remove oneself from enrollment first. CLEARLY there are still questions, so why be a hypocrite and say that they are a declared believer in the UHJ when they obviously arent
the problem is their influence on even the sharpest minds.
i remember this quote that was always taught to me growing up in Bahai school as a child.
it had to do with rotten apples.
you can have a whole batch of perfectly good apples, but all it takes is ONE rotten apple to ruin the whole bunch. thats why you need to distance the rotten apple from the healthy ones.
if the Divinely Ordained Universal House of Justice, under Divine Inspiration, declares one a Covenant Breaker, or any other party given such authority pertaining thereto, then they are as such. if one questions that then they are questioning the UHJ, so where is the faith? why not just remove oneself from enrollment first. CLEARLY there are still questions, so why be a hypocrite and say that they are a declared believer in the UHJ when they obviously arent
Dearest Keyvan,
You wrote:
I agree. And, by choice, I am no longer part of the Administrative Order of the Baha'i Faith. I was not declared a Covenant Breaker, nor was I denied any administrative rights. I simply withdrew from the AO while still in good standing.
I withdrew because I am more interested in following the Words of God as articulated by Baha'ullah rather than the vain imaginations and idle fancies of men who are only men.
I still consider myself a Baha'i, and still seek the truth of His Words through Baha'u'llah. I am very inspired by the Revelation of Baha'u'llah and His prayers, and those of the Bab.
My hope is that Baha'is who are still part of the AO embrace the all-encompassing definition of being a Baha'i as articulated by Baha'u'llah:
If we truly understand that the "People of Baha", regardless of their affiliation with the current Baha'i administration or understanding of the Word of God are Baha'is in the true sense, and unite as People of Baha, rather than vainly imagining those who disagree with us to be a "rotten apple" or a Covenant Breaker.
Because, after all, it is the Greater Covenant with God that matters most in one's spiritual life; and if we already have this Greater Covenant with God, why do we need a "lesser" Covenant with men who are only men?
Real spiritual unity requires us to give up these lesser Covenants of men and renew our Covenant with God. Only God can be the Center of our Covenant and any vain attempt of any man to place himself at the Center instead of God must be rejected.
It is only when we set aside these vain attempts to rival God by men that we will be able to embrace "all" sincere spiritual peole that want to uplift the spiritual condition of humanity, and enter into a "real' spiritual unity with the rest of the world.
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
why be a hypocrite and say that they are a declared believer in the UHJ when they obviously arent
I agree. And, by choice, I am no longer part of the Administrative Order of the Baha'i Faith. I was not declared a Covenant Breaker, nor was I denied any administrative rights. I simply withdrew from the AO while still in good standing.
I withdrew because I am more interested in following the Words of God as articulated by Baha'ullah rather than the vain imaginations and idle fancies of men who are only men.
I still consider myself a Baha'i, and still seek the truth of His Words through Baha'u'llah. I am very inspired by the Revelation of Baha'u'llah and His prayers, and those of the Bab.
My hope is that Baha'is who are still part of the AO embrace the all-encompassing definition of being a Baha'i as articulated by Baha'u'llah:
Every receptive soul who hath in this Day inhaled the fragrance of His garment and hath, with a pure heart, set his face towards the all-glorious Horizon is reckoned among the people of Bahá in the Crimson Book. -- Baha'ullah, Book of the Covenant
If we truly understand that the "People of Baha", regardless of their affiliation with the current Baha'i administration or understanding of the Word of God are Baha'is in the true sense, and unite as People of Baha, rather than vainly imagining those who disagree with us to be a "rotten apple" or a Covenant Breaker.
Because, after all, it is the Greater Covenant with God that matters most in one's spiritual life; and if we already have this Greater Covenant with God, why do we need a "lesser" Covenant with men who are only men?
Real spiritual unity requires us to give up these lesser Covenants of men and renew our Covenant with God. Only God can be the Center of our Covenant and any vain attempt of any man to place himself at the Center instead of God must be rejected.
It is only when we set aside these vain attempts to rival God by men that we will be able to embrace "all" sincere spiritual peole that want to uplift the spiritual condition of humanity, and enter into a "real' spiritual unity with the rest of the world.
With loving Baha'i regards
What is covenant breaking, today ?
Dear Guest (with loving baha'i regards....)
What is covenant breaking ?
I wish to know your conception of this.
Let me try to say to you how i view this thing.
As a new member (2 years), the word Covenant itself
still seems (to me) to be a wrong translation of the jewish and
arabic term "mytaq", wich in the classical bibles is termed Alliance,
with a capital letter.
As far as I heard, covenant breaking is an expression that was applied
to people who did not follow Abdul Baha, or did some traitorist actions
in those days while Abdul Baha was alive, or people who followed Mason Remy or Joey Marangella, instead of the appointed Guardian, our dear Shogi Effendi.
My point is: if we express our views on homosexuality, or on how
to play or not to play golf on sundays, what does it have to do with
our religion ?
The possibility of "covenenant breaking" should not induced any fear on
beleivers, nor change the way they put peanut butter on their toasts. The need for orgasms is not the same for every one, and it changes with age.
But if i do any actions or published a writing that can jeopardize or nullify the efforts of pionneers of the faith or of the House, maybe it would be correct that i received a warning. In other words, i can have views on many subjects, but i would not dare rewrite or give another meaning to the Aqdas or to the Writings. We, as individuals, shall not play a role in wich we are not authorised.
The incomplete and short analogies i make on another tread with the valleys, are a simple comparison with modern psychology, it is not the ultimate Truth, it is only my actual (always changing) understanding of it, in other words, the way i digested it. It does not replace nor refute the actual Writings of Baha'u'llah. The opinions or views of me, as an individual beleiver, are nothing, compared to the Writings of prophet Baha'u'llah.
If I declare publically that Toyota cars are fragile and subject to costly repairs, you would say : this guy is wrong, but it has nothing to do with religion.
But,
If I declare and try to prove that writings of Baha'u'llah, Abdul Baha and Shogi Effendi are wrong and fully errounous, while having this baha'i membership card and the priviledge of voting in elections (locally), then, i might be a covenant breaker.
And above that, how could i appreciate the wisdom and the happyness of being a baha'i, if i criticize all the time the decisions made by those (the UHJ) who gived their lifetime to diffuse in 800 langages a method 100 % sure to bring humanity to a superior level?
If this is the case, maybe i should simply leave the movement for a while, and see a psychiatrist.
To me, that is about what is "covenant breaking".
For the rest, i have so much to learn from the Writings
that I have not much time to think about this subject
Maybe you see cov-breaking differently, please tell me.
Majnun.
What is covenant breaking ?
I wish to know your conception of this.
Let me try to say to you how i view this thing.
As a new member (2 years), the word Covenant itself
still seems (to me) to be a wrong translation of the jewish and
arabic term "mytaq", wich in the classical bibles is termed Alliance,
with a capital letter.
As far as I heard, covenant breaking is an expression that was applied
to people who did not follow Abdul Baha, or did some traitorist actions
in those days while Abdul Baha was alive, or people who followed Mason Remy or Joey Marangella, instead of the appointed Guardian, our dear Shogi Effendi.
My point is: if we express our views on homosexuality, or on how
to play or not to play golf on sundays, what does it have to do with
our religion ?
The possibility of "covenenant breaking" should not induced any fear on
beleivers, nor change the way they put peanut butter on their toasts. The need for orgasms is not the same for every one, and it changes with age.
But if i do any actions or published a writing that can jeopardize or nullify the efforts of pionneers of the faith or of the House, maybe it would be correct that i received a warning. In other words, i can have views on many subjects, but i would not dare rewrite or give another meaning to the Aqdas or to the Writings. We, as individuals, shall not play a role in wich we are not authorised.
The incomplete and short analogies i make on another tread with the valleys, are a simple comparison with modern psychology, it is not the ultimate Truth, it is only my actual (always changing) understanding of it, in other words, the way i digested it. It does not replace nor refute the actual Writings of Baha'u'llah. The opinions or views of me, as an individual beleiver, are nothing, compared to the Writings of prophet Baha'u'llah.
If I declare publically that Toyota cars are fragile and subject to costly repairs, you would say : this guy is wrong, but it has nothing to do with religion.
But,
If I declare and try to prove that writings of Baha'u'llah, Abdul Baha and Shogi Effendi are wrong and fully errounous, while having this baha'i membership card and the priviledge of voting in elections (locally), then, i might be a covenant breaker.
And above that, how could i appreciate the wisdom and the happyness of being a baha'i, if i criticize all the time the decisions made by those (the UHJ) who gived their lifetime to diffuse in 800 langages a method 100 % sure to bring humanity to a superior level?
If this is the case, maybe i should simply leave the movement for a while, and see a psychiatrist.
To me, that is about what is "covenant breaking".
For the rest, i have so much to learn from the Writings
that I have not much time to think about this subject
Maybe you see cov-breaking differently, please tell me.
Majnun.
Dearest Majnun,
Thank you for your thoughtful reply.
You wrote:
While it is true that trying to prove the "actual" Words of a Manifestation of God false, merely "searching" for the "actual" Words, or challenging an interpretation of mere men, who are just like you or I, and who are not to be "exalted over other men because we are all bondservants of God" according to the Word of God (Aqdas), then this cannot possibly be considered "real" Covenant Breaking, and are merely the actions of a diligent seeker of the truth.
I think the confusion comes when we "exalt" other men over ourselves who are not Manifestations of God. As you have learned from the elucidation in the Valleys, we all have an equal chance of becoming one with God. So when mere men who have not achieved this station pretend that they have some "authorized" understanding that should be regarded as superior to our own, anyone should rightly question such claims since these do not emanate from the Manifestation of God.
I hope this helps.
With loving Baha'i regards
Thank you for your thoughtful reply.
You wrote:
If I declare and try to prove that writings of Baha'u'llah, Abdul Baha and Shogi Effendi are wrong and fully errounous, while having this baha'i membership card and the priviledge of voting in elections (locally), then, i might be a covenant breaker.
While it is true that trying to prove the "actual" Words of a Manifestation of God false, merely "searching" for the "actual" Words, or challenging an interpretation of mere men, who are just like you or I, and who are not to be "exalted over other men because we are all bondservants of God" according to the Word of God (Aqdas), then this cannot possibly be considered "real" Covenant Breaking, and are merely the actions of a diligent seeker of the truth.
I think the confusion comes when we "exalt" other men over ourselves who are not Manifestations of God. As you have learned from the elucidation in the Valleys, we all have an equal chance of becoming one with God. So when mere men who have not achieved this station pretend that they have some "authorized" understanding that should be regarded as superior to our own, anyone should rightly question such claims since these do not emanate from the Manifestation of God.
I hope this helps.
With loving Baha'i regards
becoming one with...
Yes, i think we share a similar concept, even if
we don't use the same terms. When you say we
"a chance to become one with God", i dont remember
seeing that line in the Valleys.
The question of unification (tauhid) explains very well
that their is no way to "equal" the Creator for now, nor
for us individual to contact any cosmic entitiy. So I ask
what do you mean by "becoming one with God" ?
Majnun.
we don't use the same terms. When you say we
"a chance to become one with God", i dont remember
seeing that line in the Valleys.
The question of unification (tauhid) explains very well
that their is no way to "equal" the Creator for now, nor
for us individual to contact any cosmic entitiy. So I ask
what do you mean by "becoming one with God" ?
Majnun.
Dearest Majnun,
You wrote:
I'm sure you recall the famous verse in the Seventh Valley before the Pen of Baha'u'llah broke:
This station is "oneness with God", but this does not mean that one becomes God, it just means that one has transcended the human ego and now perfectly reflects the Will of God and all of His wondrous virtues.
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
"a chance to become one with God", i dont remember
seeing that line in the Valleys
I'm sure you recall the famous verse in the Seventh Valley before the Pen of Baha'u'llah broke:
"They who soar in the heaven of singleness and reach the sea of the Absolute, reckon this city--which is the station of life in God--as the furthermost state of mystic knowers, and the fartherst homeland of the lovers."
This station is "oneness with God", but this does not mean that one becomes God, it just means that one has transcended the human ego and now perfectly reflects the Will of God and all of His wondrous virtues.
With loving Baha'i regards
Those appointed by God the All Mighty
Seeker,
Allah'u'abha,
It's true we don't have to exalt men over ourselves. So Baha'u'llah is the prophet of God the Most Exalted (= God the Glorious, more than a man). He appointed Abdu'l-baha (who then becomes more than a man). Abdu'l-Baha appointed Shoggi Effendi (who then becomes more than a man). And the UHJ appointed by Baha'u'llah is divinely inspired (then more than just 9 men sitting together).
The others are just men. For example the Hands of the Cause got the governance during about 6 years but never ruled spiritualy because they were just men. You will never find a book relating what their will.
So can one say he is following the Word of God the Knower, if he does'nt follow the appointed representives of God the Protector's Messenger ? In fact, for us simple men, are'nt those representatives the way of God the Omnipotent ?
Whatever, God the All-Glorious, does'nt need anyone. He is Selfsubsistant and all are His servant. If a servant wants to find Him he will. If not, no problem.
What I'm sure is that the divine plan is going on and soon, the flag of a common Faith among the people of this planet will arise. And the Administrative Order of the Baha'i Faith will give birth to World Order of Baha'u'llah as envisionned by Shoggi Effendi.
Allah'u'abha,
It's true we don't have to exalt men over ourselves. So Baha'u'llah is the prophet of God the Most Exalted (= God the Glorious, more than a man). He appointed Abdu'l-baha (who then becomes more than a man). Abdu'l-Baha appointed Shoggi Effendi (who then becomes more than a man). And the UHJ appointed by Baha'u'llah is divinely inspired (then more than just 9 men sitting together).
The others are just men. For example the Hands of the Cause got the governance during about 6 years but never ruled spiritualy because they were just men. You will never find a book relating what their will.
So can one say he is following the Word of God the Knower, if he does'nt follow the appointed representives of God the Protector's Messenger ? In fact, for us simple men, are'nt those representatives the way of God the Omnipotent ?
Whatever, God the All-Glorious, does'nt need anyone. He is Selfsubsistant and all are His servant. If a servant wants to find Him he will. If not, no problem.
What I'm sure is that the divine plan is going on and soon, the flag of a common Faith among the people of this planet will arise. And the Administrative Order of the Baha'i Faith will give birth to World Order of Baha'u'llah as envisionned by Shoggi Effendi.
Dearest Moyo,
You wrote:
Because this "contradicts" the clear and unambiguous command of Baha'u'llah that, "Let no man exalt himself above another; all are but bondslaves before the Lord, and all exemplify the truth that there is none other God but Him." (Aqdas, 72), it should lead any diligent seeker of the truth to question whether these so-called "appointments" can really have the meaning you suggest.
When Abdul-Baha tell us, "I am no Prophet, only a man like yourself." (Abdul-Baha in London, P.125), he is admitting that he is "not" more than a man, so why do we continue to exalt his interpretations of the Word of God over those of any other man, when Baha'u'llah commands us to not exalt any man over another?
And if Abdul-Baha tells us he is "only" a man himself, how can he appoint "anyone" who can be regarded as more than a man?
I think the spiritual authority of men who are "only" men must, by definition, be limited to that which does not exalt them over other men. One simply does not need the type of spiritual authority you suggest that exalts oneself over other men in order to spread the Faith of Baha'u'llah throughout the world. One only needs "administrative" authority (i.e., control over Baha'i Funds, agenda setting, administration, etc.) to promote the Faith.
What has happened is that we gave Abdul-Baha more authority than what was required, and in doing so violated the command of Baha'u'llah in the Aqdas to not exalt "any" man over another.
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
He appointed Abdu'l-baha (who then becomes more than a man). Abdu'l-Baha appointed Shoggi Effendi (who then becomes more than a man).
Because this "contradicts" the clear and unambiguous command of Baha'u'llah that, "Let no man exalt himself above another; all are but bondslaves before the Lord, and all exemplify the truth that there is none other God but Him." (Aqdas, 72), it should lead any diligent seeker of the truth to question whether these so-called "appointments" can really have the meaning you suggest.
When Abdul-Baha tell us, "I am no Prophet, only a man like yourself." (Abdul-Baha in London, P.125), he is admitting that he is "not" more than a man, so why do we continue to exalt his interpretations of the Word of God over those of any other man, when Baha'u'llah commands us to not exalt any man over another?
And if Abdul-Baha tells us he is "only" a man himself, how can he appoint "anyone" who can be regarded as more than a man?
I think the spiritual authority of men who are "only" men must, by definition, be limited to that which does not exalt them over other men. One simply does not need the type of spiritual authority you suggest that exalts oneself over other men in order to spread the Faith of Baha'u'llah throughout the world. One only needs "administrative" authority (i.e., control over Baha'i Funds, agenda setting, administration, etc.) to promote the Faith.
What has happened is that we gave Abdul-Baha more authority than what was required, and in doing so violated the command of Baha'u'llah in the Aqdas to not exalt "any" man over another.
With loving Baha'i regards
Asministrative authority
Dear friend (Guest),
Abdu'l-Baha was true in saying he is only a man, Jesus Christ also was only a man, same for Muhammad and the Bàb and Baha'u'llah. If one don't look at religious scriptures with his spiritual eye, then it is clear he will miss 50 % means he will be in his veils and in fact he will miss all.
At the moment the Word of God the knower, comes into a Manifestation, he gets the spiritual power to be/represent God the Glorious for the rest of humanity. At the moment a man (or a house) is appointed by the Manifestation of God the Omnipotent, he changes the same way. So at the moment it is Baha'u'llah Himself who exalted Abdu'l-Baha among the others, I don't see where is the problem. For me it is an evidence. And be quiet, I'm not born in a baha'i family. I became baha'i about 1 year ago just by reading texts.
I don't know why in this dispensiation it's like that (notice it has never happened since Adam) but I know it is like that. So I follow with humility. And as I said God the self subsistant, doesn't need our approval. We have the choice to accept or refuse.
I'm very happy with this at all. Can you imagine. We have God the Greatest on this planet, 24h/24. If you have a question you ask God the protector by email or by post he will give an answer. I ask myself if baha'is are really feeling how lucky they are.
Anyway accoding to you, dear "Guest", who has/or who should have had the authority to manage baha'i fund, communication, and all the stuff now ? And what do you suggest me to do ? To deny the reality of the UHJ ? And to stay in my room with the Aqdas ? Then in what will I be different to a muslism or a christian or a jude ? And how will I teach the message of Baha'u'llah ? Who will guide me ? Who will tell me what to do according to the present conditions of the world ? Who will give me a material to teach the youth accordingly to the principles of virtues ?... I think I would have no choice than back to the catholic church. At least there I had the belief that Jesus would come from the sky and get me in paradise with beuatiful virgins women
I wait a clear response if u don't mind.
Thank you for your attention (notice I'm a french speaker and excuse me for my bad english).
P.S. Abdu'l-Baha said also that Baha'u'llah knew Abdu'l-Baha would be his successor since Abdu'l-Baha's childhood (don't remember where I read it). He said that he knew it by a spiritual way.
Abdu'l-Baha was true in saying he is only a man, Jesus Christ also was only a man, same for Muhammad and the Bàb and Baha'u'llah. If one don't look at religious scriptures with his spiritual eye, then it is clear he will miss 50 % means he will be in his veils and in fact he will miss all.
At the moment the Word of God the knower, comes into a Manifestation, he gets the spiritual power to be/represent God the Glorious for the rest of humanity. At the moment a man (or a house) is appointed by the Manifestation of God the Omnipotent, he changes the same way. So at the moment it is Baha'u'llah Himself who exalted Abdu'l-Baha among the others, I don't see where is the problem. For me it is an evidence. And be quiet, I'm not born in a baha'i family. I became baha'i about 1 year ago just by reading texts.
I don't know why in this dispensiation it's like that (notice it has never happened since Adam) but I know it is like that. So I follow with humility. And as I said God the self subsistant, doesn't need our approval. We have the choice to accept or refuse.
I'm very happy with this at all. Can you imagine. We have God the Greatest on this planet, 24h/24. If you have a question you ask God the protector by email or by post he will give an answer. I ask myself if baha'is are really feeling how lucky they are.
Anyway accoding to you, dear "Guest", who has/or who should have had the authority to manage baha'i fund, communication, and all the stuff now ? And what do you suggest me to do ? To deny the reality of the UHJ ? And to stay in my room with the Aqdas ? Then in what will I be different to a muslism or a christian or a jude ? And how will I teach the message of Baha'u'llah ? Who will guide me ? Who will tell me what to do according to the present conditions of the world ? Who will give me a material to teach the youth accordingly to the principles of virtues ?... I think I would have no choice than back to the catholic church. At least there I had the belief that Jesus would come from the sky and get me in paradise with beuatiful virgins women
![big grin :D](/web/20210423051317im_/https://bahai-library.com/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
I wait a clear response if u don't mind.
Thank you for your attention (notice I'm a french speaker and excuse me for my bad english).
P.S. Abdu'l-Baha said also that Baha'u'llah knew Abdu'l-Baha would be his successor since Abdu'l-Baha's childhood (don't remember where I read it). He said that he knew it by a spiritual way.
Dearest Moyo,
You wrote:
In the same quote in my last post, Abdul-Baha also says that "I am no Prophet" (Abdul-Baha in London, P. 125). So one cannot equate the station of Abdul-Baha with Jesus, Muhammad, or Baha'u'llah.
While it is true that one changes when given the enormous responsibility of leading a Faith, leadership, in and of itself, does not give one spiritual authority to exalt one's interpretations of God's Word over others.
You also wrote:
These things that you are rightly concerned about fall into the category of "administrative" tasks, and certainly someone must have responsibility for carrying out these tasks. The UHJ, if directly elected by the People of Baha, is just as good, if not better than any single individual, in directing the Baha'i Administration, but his does not give them a spiritual license to violate the commands of Baha'ullah and exalt men over other men by exalting the interpretations of men who are only men over those of others. The most they can say is "this is our best understanding of the Writings", which is the most anyone can say.
You should also remember that the House is only as good as its individual members. It is therefore "critical" that the purest souls available (including women) are chosen.
So listen to the House for guidance, but listen carefully. Make sure what they are telling you is consistent with what is Revealed; and if it is not, you have just as much right as any child of God to question actions or writings of the House that contradict the Word of God.
Your primary obligation is to God, and only God, as made manifest through His wondrous Manifestations. Any men who are only men must conform to this reality.
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
Abdu'l-Baha was true in saying he is only a man, Jesus Christ also was only a man, same for Muhammad and the Bàb and Baha'u'llah.
In the same quote in my last post, Abdul-Baha also says that "I am no Prophet" (Abdul-Baha in London, P. 125). So one cannot equate the station of Abdul-Baha with Jesus, Muhammad, or Baha'u'llah.
While it is true that one changes when given the enormous responsibility of leading a Faith, leadership, in and of itself, does not give one spiritual authority to exalt one's interpretations of God's Word over others.
You also wrote:
dear "Guest", who has/or who should have had the authority to manage baha'i fund, communication, and all the stuff now ? And what do you suggest me to do ? To deny the reality of the UHJ ? And to stay in my room with the Aqdas ? Then in what will I be different to a muslism or a christian or a jude ? And how will I teach the message of Baha'u'llah ? Who will guide me ? Who will tell me what to do according to the present conditions of the world ? Who will give me a material to teach the youth accordingly to the principles of virtues ?...
These things that you are rightly concerned about fall into the category of "administrative" tasks, and certainly someone must have responsibility for carrying out these tasks. The UHJ, if directly elected by the People of Baha, is just as good, if not better than any single individual, in directing the Baha'i Administration, but his does not give them a spiritual license to violate the commands of Baha'ullah and exalt men over other men by exalting the interpretations of men who are only men over those of others. The most they can say is "this is our best understanding of the Writings", which is the most anyone can say.
You should also remember that the House is only as good as its individual members. It is therefore "critical" that the purest souls available (including women) are chosen.
So listen to the House for guidance, but listen carefully. Make sure what they are telling you is consistent with what is Revealed; and if it is not, you have just as much right as any child of God to question actions or writings of the House that contradict the Word of God.
Your primary obligation is to God, and only God, as made manifest through His wondrous Manifestations. Any men who are only men must conform to this reality.
With loving Baha'i regards
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
Re: What is covenant breaking, today ?
majnun wrote: My point is: if we express our views on homosexuality, or on how to play or not to play golf on sundays, what does it have to do with our religion ?
the golf as far as i know has nothing to do with our religion. but if you express your views on homosexuality, on politics, etc., like many new Baha'is do, my question is: who the hell cares? what i mean is, who cares that you think homosexuals should marry, adopt kids, and that marijuana should be legalized? the Writings explicitly state that you are not to get involved in politics (especially for your own protection), and explicitly state that homosexuality is wrong, is a disease, and can be overcome. so what more is there to say? if you feel passionate about these political issues, at least don't let others know you are a Baha'i. the more Baha'is get involved in this stuff, the more we as a religion regress. i know this stuff is unavoidable, as you have to read a lot of this junk in your sociology classes, but don't let it get to you.
to warrior and guest
Good point Warrior. Our opinions are so transitory and changing.
to Guest loving... yes i remember, but this english translation
is not my cup or tea. I prefer the persian text compared side by side
with the corresponding description of each valley in Gems.
But you have a nice way to view that thing, the reflection (mirror like)
is in line with how i understand this whole concept.
Majnun.
to Guest loving... yes i remember, but this english translation
is not my cup or tea. I prefer the persian text compared side by side
with the corresponding description of each valley in Gems.
But you have a nice way to view that thing, the reflection (mirror like)
is in line with how i understand this whole concept.
Majnun.
first of all the Hands of the Cause of God under those 6 years were acting under the ordainances of the Guardian which lasted until 1963. had they acted independently beyond then, then it may be fuzzy. but it didnt happen for the Hands of the Cause speak not except by His leave and only in Accordance with the Holy Tablet.
as for the rest. to me it is clear and explicit. if you believe Baha'u'llah was not who He said He was, and rather you believe He was a deep thinker or something, then i can understand how you will take like half of what He said; picking and choosing.
but if you believe He is a Prophet, then thus everything He says is true.
thus, what He said about Abdul Baha is true, and you MUST accept His words. to not have faith in Him is to not have absolute faith in Baha'u'llah, but rather picking and choosing. same with Shoghi Effendi and the UHJ
yes the UHJ as members alone are nothing. no one will contest that. but as nine....
also majnun, you see, this goes to prove my point. i think the west NEEDS to learn of Islam to truely understand what this faith is all about.
the POINT of this Dispensation IS the Administrative Order. its not just some machine to fight against. one in which you can pick and choose if you like or not.
anything else is a new agey adulturation of the faith and a stray from its purpose.
as for the rest. to me it is clear and explicit. if you believe Baha'u'llah was not who He said He was, and rather you believe He was a deep thinker or something, then i can understand how you will take like half of what He said; picking and choosing.
but if you believe He is a Prophet, then thus everything He says is true.
thus, what He said about Abdul Baha is true, and you MUST accept His words. to not have faith in Him is to not have absolute faith in Baha'u'llah, but rather picking and choosing. same with Shoghi Effendi and the UHJ
yes the UHJ as members alone are nothing. no one will contest that. but as nine....
The sacred and youthful branch, the Guardian of the Cause of God, as well as the Universal House of Justice to be universally elected and established, are both under the care and protection of the Abha Beauty, under the shelter and unerring guidance of the Exalted One (may my life be offered up for them both). Whatsoever they decide is of God.
(Abdu'l-Baha, The Will and Testament, p. 11)
It is incumbent upon these members (of the Universal House of Justice) to gather in a certain place and deliberate upon all problems which have caused difference, questions that are obscure and matters that are not expressly recorded in the Book. Whatsoever they decide has the same effect as the Text itself.
(Abdu'l-Baha, The Will and Testament, p. 20)
All must seek guidance and turn unto the Center of the Cause and the House of Justice. And he that turneth unto whatsoever else is indeed in grievous error.
(Abdu'l-Baha, The Will and Testament, p. 25)
also majnun, you see, this goes to prove my point. i think the west NEEDS to learn of Islam to truely understand what this faith is all about.
The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said:
"Even if the entire duration of the world's
existence has already been exhausted and only one day is left before
Doomsday (Day of judgment), Allah will expand that day to such a
length of time, as to accommodate the kingdom of a person out of my
Ahlul-Bayt who will be called by my name. He will then fill out the
earth with peace and justice as it will have been full of injustice
and tyranny before then."
The Prophet (PBUH) said:
"We (I and my family) are members of a household that Allah (SWT) has chosen for them the life of the Hereafter over the life of this world; and the members of my household (Ahlul-Bayt) shall suffer a great affliction and they shall be forcefully expelled from their homes after my death; then there will come people from the East carrying black flags, and they will ask for some good to be given to them, but they shall be refused service; as such, they will wage war and emerge victorious, and will be offered that which they desired in the first place, but they will refuse to accept it, until a man from my family (Ahlul-Bayt) appears to fill the Earth with justice as it has been filled with corruption. So whoever reachs that (time) aught to come to them even if crowling on the ice/snow."
Sunni reference:
Sunan Ibn Majah, V2, Tradition #4082,
The History Tabari (Tareekh Tabari)
al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, pp 250-251
the POINT of this Dispensation IS the Administrative Order. its not just some machine to fight against. one in which you can pick and choose if you like or not.
anything else is a new agey adulturation of the faith and a stray from its purpose.
Dearest Keyvan,
You wrote:
Where in the Writings of Baha'u'llah does He say that the point of His Dispensation is Administrative Order?
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
the POINT of this Dispensation IS the Administrative Order. its not just some machine to fight against. one in which you can pick and choose if you like or not.
Where in the Writings of Baha'u'llah does He say that the point of His Dispensation is Administrative Order?
With loving Baha'i regards
listen i know its very hard for someone of the western background who just takes the writings and makes whatever they want out of them to understand this, but its very clear as this is the purpose of Imam Mahdi. what do you think the Kingdom of God on Earth is all about.
writings?
ok read the Aqdas. reflect on the first paragraph.
everything that has been layed out since then is a product of it. what other religion has layed out in its Book the centricity of an institution such as the Universal House of Justice in such explicit detail and in all the Tablets and in all that you as a westerner cannot read because you are not fluent in Persian or Arabic. 90% of the writings are untranslated.
writings?
ok read the Aqdas. reflect on the first paragraph.
everything that has been layed out since then is a product of it. what other religion has layed out in its Book the centricity of an institution such as the Universal House of Justice in such explicit detail and in all the Tablets and in all that you as a westerner cannot read because you are not fluent in Persian or Arabic. 90% of the writings are untranslated.
THE TABLET OF ISHRAQAT
THE EIGHTH ISHRAQ
This passage, now written by the Pen of Glory, is
accounted as part of the Most Holy Book: The men of
God's House of Justice have been charged with the
affairs of the people. They, in truth, are the Trustees of
God among His servants and the daysprings of
authority in His countries.
O people of God! That which traineth the world is
Justice, for it is upheld by two pillars, reward and
punishment. These two pillars are the sources of life to
the world. Inasmuch as for each day there is a new
problem and for every problem an expedient solution,
such affairs should be referred to the House of Justice
that the members thereof may act according to the
needs and requirements of the time. They that, for the
sake of God, arise to serve His Cause, are the recipients
of divine inspiration from the unseen Kingdom. It is
incumbent upon all to be obedient unto them. All
matters of State should be referred to the House of
Justice, but acts of worship must be observed according
to that which God hath revealed in His Book.
Dearest Keyvan,
You have not produced any Writing from Baha'u'llah that says the "main point" of His Dispensation is Administrative Order.
The quote you cite does not give the House the authority to exalt their interpretations of the Word of God over other men, and therefore no one has to obey these interpretations.
The obedience contemplated in the quote you provided is for the enforcement of Baha'i law to protect citizens and keep civil order, much like the local judges in our court system (the House of Justices were to be local, and the "Universal" House of Justice is really a creation of Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi rather than Baha'u'llah. And "any" obedience to any man or institution must be limited by the Word of god itself, otherwise the House becomes our god rather than God.
I offer you this alternative thought that the "main point" of the Revelation of Baha'u'llah is the same "main point" in all of the Dispensations of the past; that one's purpose for existence is being defined in spiritual terms, requiring the most sincere effort to cultivate as many virtues of God as possible before the death of the body. Each subsequent Dispensation attempts to refine the method for cultivating these virtues, but cultivating them "is" the main point. All else, including administration, simply serves this main point. Accordingly, if through empirical observation it is found that the administration is hindering this cultivation of virtues, it is the administration that must adjust rather than the one cultivating the virtues.
With loving Baha'i regards
You have not produced any Writing from Baha'u'llah that says the "main point" of His Dispensation is Administrative Order.
The quote you cite does not give the House the authority to exalt their interpretations of the Word of God over other men, and therefore no one has to obey these interpretations.
The obedience contemplated in the quote you provided is for the enforcement of Baha'i law to protect citizens and keep civil order, much like the local judges in our court system (the House of Justices were to be local, and the "Universal" House of Justice is really a creation of Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi rather than Baha'u'llah. And "any" obedience to any man or institution must be limited by the Word of god itself, otherwise the House becomes our god rather than God.
I offer you this alternative thought that the "main point" of the Revelation of Baha'u'llah is the same "main point" in all of the Dispensations of the past; that one's purpose for existence is being defined in spiritual terms, requiring the most sincere effort to cultivate as many virtues of God as possible before the death of the body. Each subsequent Dispensation attempts to refine the method for cultivating these virtues, but cultivating them "is" the main point. All else, including administration, simply serves this main point. Accordingly, if through empirical observation it is found that the administration is hindering this cultivation of virtues, it is the administration that must adjust rather than the one cultivating the virtues.
With loving Baha'i regards
Higher grounds
Dear friends:
The word "rhetoric" means intellectualisation.
It is useless after the emergence occurs in valley 9
(2 out of the four). A bit like this guy who go out to
face the outside world, he let the 7 or 8 prececent valleys,
(explored zones) to sleep for 300 years. This cavern is our
head, and we let go of these personalities, behind us. We
put them to sleep forever.
Hmm, it is like a vinyl record, you simply lift the little arm,
the contact of the needle with the disk (our past recording)
is volontaraly not used anymore. Inner and outer silence
does incicates that emergence. The recourses to arguments
is therefore not liked, not usefull. The "rhetohric" is put off, and
we begin our new life, in contact with the present, while saying
goodbye to our own past.
(this is an image, you understand).
Majnun.
.
The word "rhetoric" means intellectualisation.
It is useless after the emergence occurs in valley 9
(2 out of the four). A bit like this guy who go out to
face the outside world, he let the 7 or 8 prececent valleys,
(explored zones) to sleep for 300 years. This cavern is our
head, and we let go of these personalities, behind us. We
put them to sleep forever.
Hmm, it is like a vinyl record, you simply lift the little arm,
the contact of the needle with the disk (our past recording)
is volontaraly not used anymore. Inner and outer silence
does incicates that emergence. The recourses to arguments
is therefore not liked, not usefull. The "rhetohric" is put off, and
we begin our new life, in contact with the present, while saying
goodbye to our own past.
(this is an image, you understand).
Majnun.
.
see what you are doing is trying to specify their role. there was no further specification in said Tablet. thus it must be in general. that is why the Administrative Order followed with Baha'u'llah appointing the Interperetor and His successive Interperator, to whom we know of this infallibility.
youre just trying to get out of stuff so you can make up whatever you want, instead of following what is CLEAR AND EXPLICIT
i say this to you because you are one who does not believe in a succession of interperetors, so in that case you must take the GENERAL truth that we must all obey THE UHJ. that what they receive is of God. if what they receive is of God, than what they put out is INFALLIBLE and you can not try to contradict a word of what they say.
you cant have it both ways
and as for it being the point. i put that out through the prophecies of Imam Mahdi for which i have already quoted. a westerner like you would take this religon in glib though, its a common problem among the western bahais or people who call themselves bahais.
youre just trying to get out of stuff so you can make up whatever you want, instead of following what is CLEAR AND EXPLICIT
i say this to you because you are one who does not believe in a succession of interperetors, so in that case you must take the GENERAL truth that we must all obey THE UHJ. that what they receive is of God. if what they receive is of God, than what they put out is INFALLIBLE and you can not try to contradict a word of what they say.
you cant have it both ways
and as for it being the point. i put that out through the prophecies of Imam Mahdi for which i have already quoted. a westerner like you would take this religon in glib though, its a common problem among the western bahais or people who call themselves bahais.
Dearest Keyvan,
I think you are reading too much into that Tablet.
Consider this verse from the same Tablet:
"Matters of State" contemplated here are civil and criminal law issues necessary for maintaining peace and order in civil society, whereas "acts of worship" are spiritual affairs to which the House is to have no authority since the authority is the Word of God itself.
What you and others have done is cross the line between "matters of state" and "acts of worship" and have given the House authority over spiritual matters such as whose interpretation of the Word of God is to be followed by the Baha'i community. The House does not have the authority to require obedience to any interpretation of the Word of God outside of civil and criminal law issues (matters of state). So while it may be well within their authority to request obedience to decisions regarding theft, murder, inheritance, marriage, etc., decisions on whether women possess the spiritual capacity to serve on the House or whether homosexuality is a spiritual depravity or a condition of birth like being born left-handed, are matters of individual conscience and spiritual discernment by individual believers through their own understanding of the Word of God.
Imposing another man's understanding of the Word of God on others in these areas of individual conscience is a violation of Baha'u'llah's specific command in verse 72 of the Aqdas that "no man exalt himself over another because we are all bondservants of God".
With loving Baha'i regards,
-Matt
I think you are reading too much into that Tablet.
Consider this verse from the same Tablet:
All matters of State should be referred to the House of
Justice, but acts of worship must be observed according
to that which God hath revealed in His Book.
"Matters of State" contemplated here are civil and criminal law issues necessary for maintaining peace and order in civil society, whereas "acts of worship" are spiritual affairs to which the House is to have no authority since the authority is the Word of God itself.
What you and others have done is cross the line between "matters of state" and "acts of worship" and have given the House authority over spiritual matters such as whose interpretation of the Word of God is to be followed by the Baha'i community. The House does not have the authority to require obedience to any interpretation of the Word of God outside of civil and criminal law issues (matters of state). So while it may be well within their authority to request obedience to decisions regarding theft, murder, inheritance, marriage, etc., decisions on whether women possess the spiritual capacity to serve on the House or whether homosexuality is a spiritual depravity or a condition of birth like being born left-handed, are matters of individual conscience and spiritual discernment by individual believers through their own understanding of the Word of God.
Imposing another man's understanding of the Word of God on others in these areas of individual conscience is a violation of Baha'u'llah's specific command in verse 72 of the Aqdas that "no man exalt himself over another because we are all bondservants of God".
With loving Baha'i regards,
-Matt
that is what is written IN ADDITION to that GRAND STATEMENT which i quoted. its not one or the other, it' s both. youve proved nothing
in addition. do you not believe in the Imamate?
thats the paradigm predicating the self-proclaimed station of The Bab
if you believe in the Imamate, how can you try to pass off the Bahai Institutions following Baha'u'llah
with such an important and tedious task that lay ahead, do you honestly think that THIS of all successions would be anything short of FAR greater than the previous Dispensations'
and you havent addressed everything i said.
in addition. do you not believe in the Imamate?
thats the paradigm predicating the self-proclaimed station of The Bab
if you believe in the Imamate, how can you try to pass off the Bahai Institutions following Baha'u'llah
with such an important and tedious task that lay ahead, do you honestly think that THIS of all successions would be anything short of FAR greater than the previous Dispensations'
and you havent addressed everything i said.
Driftin'
Dear friends:
Since this "tread" was lauched on a question (by Darrick)
on the subject if we are aloud to speak to convenant breakers
or to ortodox bahai's, it seems we drifted a bit from the basic
question.
I think a bahai person is able to speak to anyone on the planet
even if that other person beleives in other concepts. The question
of the "return" of the 12th Imam is treated fully in the book of
Certitude.
Let us enjoy lucidity together.
Majnun.
Since this "tread" was lauched on a question (by Darrick)
on the subject if we are aloud to speak to convenant breakers
or to ortodox bahai's, it seems we drifted a bit from the basic
question.
I think a bahai person is able to speak to anyone on the planet
even if that other person beleives in other concepts. The question
of the "return" of the 12th Imam is treated fully in the book of
Certitude.
Let us enjoy lucidity together.
Majnun.
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
i don't know why you guys are wasting your time trying to convince this ex-Baha'i, or whatever he is. it is futile. trying to convince this type is like casting pearls before swine, and therefore this kind of "conversation" doesn't get us anywhere. 'Abdu'l-Baha talks about how there exists people in this world that are not spiritually receptive, and that their hearts are made of stone; nothing can penetrate them. you can provide proofs and discuss stuff with these kinds of guys until you are blue in the face, but after a while, doesn't it become clear that the whole thing is pointless? they thrive on the disunity they create when they debate with other Baha'is. they play these word games, and their hearts (or souls) are not open, or receptive. if you are an educated and cunning enough person, you can play word games and always have a "response." likewise, we can always provide a counter-response. but should we, when it is clear that we are just beating a dead horse? this is the sign of spiritual disease, and you should act accordingly. and just like you would avoid a room which has anthrax in it, you should in the same way avoid this type. there is no such law, but it is just common sense. you should never knowingly place yourself into situations in which there will be a test, just like you don't go into a whorehouse and sit there and read a holy book, hoping nothing will happen, or go to a bar every night with your buddies and think that you will never be tempted to drink.
Dearest Baha'i Warrior,
I am saddened to learn that you think others should agree with you or they have some spiritual disease requiring you to stay away from them.
It is precisely this attitude that is preventing the Baha'i Faith from gaining any real spiritual traction. Most sincere spiritual people in the world are simply not attracted to religion that does not have God at the Center of its Covenant, and has displaced God with men who are only men. With God at the Center, then all are equal before God and none are exalted over others no matter how much they differ in their point of view.
Real spiritual unity transcends well beyond the "us vs. them" duality and truly comprehends that the same God in you is the same God in me.
What you and others are suggesting is for us to go back to the egotistical self-righteous view that "our" opinions are superior to others, so these "others" should be avoided until they agree with "us". How can you unite the Baha'i Faith, let alone the world, with such an immature view? Since even very reasonable spiritual people are bound to disagree with you, how can you unite the spiritual world with your self-righteous attitude?
Letting go of the ego and self and dwelling with the God that resides in each and every one of us is the only path to true spiritual unity. Ego and the illusion of duality simply keep you trapped in a false notion of self and distant from anyone else who has not shared in your false notion or is reckoned as part of the counterweight in the duality going on your head.
Let go of self and embrace God.
With loving Baha'i regards,
-Matt
I am saddened to learn that you think others should agree with you or they have some spiritual disease requiring you to stay away from them.
It is precisely this attitude that is preventing the Baha'i Faith from gaining any real spiritual traction. Most sincere spiritual people in the world are simply not attracted to religion that does not have God at the Center of its Covenant, and has displaced God with men who are only men. With God at the Center, then all are equal before God and none are exalted over others no matter how much they differ in their point of view.
Real spiritual unity transcends well beyond the "us vs. them" duality and truly comprehends that the same God in you is the same God in me.
What you and others are suggesting is for us to go back to the egotistical self-righteous view that "our" opinions are superior to others, so these "others" should be avoided until they agree with "us". How can you unite the Baha'i Faith, let alone the world, with such an immature view? Since even very reasonable spiritual people are bound to disagree with you, how can you unite the spiritual world with your self-righteous attitude?
Letting go of the ego and self and dwelling with the God that resides in each and every one of us is the only path to true spiritual unity. Ego and the illusion of duality simply keep you trapped in a false notion of self and distant from anyone else who has not shared in your false notion or is reckoned as part of the counterweight in the duality going on your head.
Let go of self and embrace God.
With loving Baha'i regards,
-Matt
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
O CHILDREN OF NEGLIGENCE AND PASSION!
Ye have suffered My enemy to enter My house and have cast out My friend, for ye have enshrined the love of another than Me in your hearts. Give ear to the sayings of the Friend and turn towards His paradise. Worldly friends, seeking their own good, appear to love one the other, whereas the true Friend has loved and doth love you for your own sakes; indeed He hath suffered for your guidance countless afflictions. Be not disloyal to such a Friend, nay rather hasten unto Him. Such is the day-star of the word of truth and faithfulness, that hath dawned above the horizon of the pen of the Lord of all names. Open your ears that ye may hearken unto the word of God, the Help in peril, the Self-existent.
____________________________________________________________
O MY SON!
The company of the ungodly increaseth sorrow, whilst fellowship with the righteous cleaneth the rust from off the heart. He that seeketh to commune with God, let him betake himself to the companionship of His loved ones; and he that desireth to hearken unto the word of God, let him give ear to the words of His chosen ones.
____________________________________________________________
O SON OF DUST!
Beware! Walk not with the ungodly and seek not fellowship with him, for such companionship turneth the radiance of the heart into infernal fire.
____________________________________________________________
O MY FRIENDS!
Call ye to mind that covenant ye have entered into with Me upon Mount Paran, situate within the hallowed precincts of Zaman. I have taken to witness the concourse on high and the dwellers in the city of eternity, yet now none do I find faithful unto the covenant. Of a certainty pride and rebellion have effaced it from the hearts, in such wise that no trace thereof remaineth. Yet knowing this, I waited and disclosed it not.
____________________________________________________________
O SON OF THE WONDROUS VISION!
I have breathed within thee a breath of My own Spirit, that thou mayest be My lover. Why hast thou forsaken Me and sought a beloved other than Me?
Ye have suffered My enemy to enter My house and have cast out My friend, for ye have enshrined the love of another than Me in your hearts. Give ear to the sayings of the Friend and turn towards His paradise. Worldly friends, seeking their own good, appear to love one the other, whereas the true Friend has loved and doth love you for your own sakes; indeed He hath suffered for your guidance countless afflictions. Be not disloyal to such a Friend, nay rather hasten unto Him. Such is the day-star of the word of truth and faithfulness, that hath dawned above the horizon of the pen of the Lord of all names. Open your ears that ye may hearken unto the word of God, the Help in peril, the Self-existent.
____________________________________________________________
O MY SON!
The company of the ungodly increaseth sorrow, whilst fellowship with the righteous cleaneth the rust from off the heart. He that seeketh to commune with God, let him betake himself to the companionship of His loved ones; and he that desireth to hearken unto the word of God, let him give ear to the words of His chosen ones.
____________________________________________________________
O SON OF DUST!
Beware! Walk not with the ungodly and seek not fellowship with him, for such companionship turneth the radiance of the heart into infernal fire.
____________________________________________________________
O MY FRIENDS!
Call ye to mind that covenant ye have entered into with Me upon Mount Paran, situate within the hallowed precincts of Zaman. I have taken to witness the concourse on high and the dwellers in the city of eternity, yet now none do I find faithful unto the covenant. Of a certainty pride and rebellion have effaced it from the hearts, in such wise that no trace thereof remaineth. Yet knowing this, I waited and disclosed it not.
____________________________________________________________
O SON OF THE WONDROUS VISION!
I have breathed within thee a breath of My own Spirit, that thou mayest be My lover. Why hast thou forsaken Me and sought a beloved other than Me?
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
In League with the Covenant, not Satan
PRAISE be to Thee, O Lord, my Best Beloved! Make me steadfast in Thy Cause and grant that I may be reckoned among those who have not violated Thy Covenant nor followed the gods of their own idle fancy. Enable me, then, to obtain a seat of truth in Thy presence, bestow upon me a token of Thy mercy and let me join with such of Thy servants as shall have no fear nor shall they be put to grief. Abandon me not to myself, O my Lord, nor deprive me of recognizing Him Who is the Manifestation of Thine Own Self, nor account me with such as have turned away from Thy holy presence. Number me, O my God, with those who are privileged to fix their gaze upon Thy Beauty and who take such delight therein that they would not exchange a single moment thereof with the sovereignty of the kingdom of heavens and earth or with the entire realm of creation. Have mercy on me, O Lord, in these days when the peoples of Thine earth have erred grievously; supply me then, O my God, with that which is good and seemly in Thine estimation. Thou art verily the All-Powerful, the Gracious, the Bountiful, the Ever-Forgiving.
(The Bab, Selections from the Writings of the Bab, p. 215)
____________________________________________________________
O ye beloved of God, know that steadfastness and firmness in this new and wonderful Covenant is indeed the spirit that quickeneth the hearts which are overflowing with the love of the Glorious Lord; verily, it is the power which penetrates into the hearts of the people of the world! Your Lord hath assuredly promised His servants who are firm and steadfast to render them victorious at all times, to exalt their word, propagate their power, diffuse their lights, strengthen their hearts, elevate their banners, assist their hosts, brighten their stars, increase the abundance of the showers of mercy upon them, and enable the brave lions to conquer.
____________________________________________________________
Salutation and praise, blessing and glory rest upon that primal branch of the Divine and Sacred Lote-Tree, grown out, blest, tender, verdant and flourishing from the Twin Holy Trees; the most wondrous, unique and priceless pearl that doth gleam from out the twin surging seas; upon the offshoots of the Tree of Holiness, the twigs of the Celestial Tree, they that in the Day of the Great Dividing have stood fast and firm in the Covenant; upon the Hands (pillars) of the Cause of God that have diffused widely the Divine Fragrances, declared His Proofs, proclaimed His Faith, published abroad His Law, detached themselves from all things but Him, stood for righteousness in this world, and kindled the Fire of the Love of God in the very hearts and souls of His servants; upon them that have believed, rested assured, stood steadfast in His Covenant and followed the Light that after my passing shineth from the Dayspring of Divine Guidance -- for behold! he is the blest and sacred bough that hath branched out from the Twin Holy Trees.
(Abdu'l-Bahá, Bahá'í World Faith - Abdu'l-Bahá Section, p. 439)
____________________________________________________________
O ye League of the Covenant! Verily the Abha Beauty made a promise to the beloved who are steadfast in the Covenant, that He would reinforce their strivings with the strongest of supports, and succour them with His triumphant might. Erelong shall ye see that your illumined assemblage hath left conspicuous signs and tokens in the hearts and souls of men. Hold ye fast to the hem of God's garment, and direct all your efforts toward furthering His Covenant, and burning ever more brightly with the fire of His love, that your hearts may leap for joy in the breathings of servitude which well out from the breast of Abdu'l-Bahá. Rally your hearts, make firm your steps, trust in the everlasting bounties that will be shed upon you, one following another from the Kingdom of Abha.
(Abdu'l-Bahá, Selections from the Writings of Abdu'l-Bahá, p. 85)
____________________________________________________________
Praise be to God, ye are firm and steadfast; be ye thankful that like unto blessed trees ye are firmly planted in the soil of the Covenant. It is sure that every firm one will grow, will yield new fruits and will increase daily in freshness and grace. Reflect upon all the writings of Bahá'u'lláh, whether epistles or prayers, and ye shall surely come across a thousand passages wherein Bahá'u'lláh prays: 'O God! Bring to naught the violators of the Covenant and defeat the oppressors of the Testament.' >>>'He who denieth the Covenant and the Testament is rejected by God, <<<and he who remaineth firm and steadfast therein is favoured at the Threshold of Oneness.' Such sayings and prayers abound, refer to them and ye shall know.
(Abdu'l-Bahá, Selections from the Writings of Abdu'l-Bahá, p. 211)
(The Bab, Selections from the Writings of the Bab, p. 215)
____________________________________________________________
O ye beloved of God, know that steadfastness and firmness in this new and wonderful Covenant is indeed the spirit that quickeneth the hearts which are overflowing with the love of the Glorious Lord; verily, it is the power which penetrates into the hearts of the people of the world! Your Lord hath assuredly promised His servants who are firm and steadfast to render them victorious at all times, to exalt their word, propagate their power, diffuse their lights, strengthen their hearts, elevate their banners, assist their hosts, brighten their stars, increase the abundance of the showers of mercy upon them, and enable the brave lions to conquer.
____________________________________________________________
Salutation and praise, blessing and glory rest upon that primal branch of the Divine and Sacred Lote-Tree, grown out, blest, tender, verdant and flourishing from the Twin Holy Trees; the most wondrous, unique and priceless pearl that doth gleam from out the twin surging seas; upon the offshoots of the Tree of Holiness, the twigs of the Celestial Tree, they that in the Day of the Great Dividing have stood fast and firm in the Covenant; upon the Hands (pillars) of the Cause of God that have diffused widely the Divine Fragrances, declared His Proofs, proclaimed His Faith, published abroad His Law, detached themselves from all things but Him, stood for righteousness in this world, and kindled the Fire of the Love of God in the very hearts and souls of His servants; upon them that have believed, rested assured, stood steadfast in His Covenant and followed the Light that after my passing shineth from the Dayspring of Divine Guidance -- for behold! he is the blest and sacred bough that hath branched out from the Twin Holy Trees.
(Abdu'l-Bahá, Bahá'í World Faith - Abdu'l-Bahá Section, p. 439)
____________________________________________________________
O ye League of the Covenant! Verily the Abha Beauty made a promise to the beloved who are steadfast in the Covenant, that He would reinforce their strivings with the strongest of supports, and succour them with His triumphant might. Erelong shall ye see that your illumined assemblage hath left conspicuous signs and tokens in the hearts and souls of men. Hold ye fast to the hem of God's garment, and direct all your efforts toward furthering His Covenant, and burning ever more brightly with the fire of His love, that your hearts may leap for joy in the breathings of servitude which well out from the breast of Abdu'l-Bahá. Rally your hearts, make firm your steps, trust in the everlasting bounties that will be shed upon you, one following another from the Kingdom of Abha.
(Abdu'l-Bahá, Selections from the Writings of Abdu'l-Bahá, p. 85)
____________________________________________________________
Praise be to God, ye are firm and steadfast; be ye thankful that like unto blessed trees ye are firmly planted in the soil of the Covenant. It is sure that every firm one will grow, will yield new fruits and will increase daily in freshness and grace. Reflect upon all the writings of Bahá'u'lláh, whether epistles or prayers, and ye shall surely come across a thousand passages wherein Bahá'u'lláh prays: 'O God! Bring to naught the violators of the Covenant and defeat the oppressors of the Testament.' >>>'He who denieth the Covenant and the Testament is rejected by God, <<<and he who remaineth firm and steadfast therein is favoured at the Threshold of Oneness.' Such sayings and prayers abound, refer to them and ye shall know.
(Abdu'l-Bahá, Selections from the Writings of Abdu'l-Bahá, p. 211)
this is hopeless.
heres the way i see it. and this isnt just about the Current Dispensation but religion in general
religions are given Administrative Orders, all of them, and they vary in degrees.
my stool knows enough about the Prophecy of this Dispensation enough so to know that the weight on the Administrative Order is SO HIGH, in it is in direct relation to the purpose of this Dispensation.
regardless, my point is, that no matter what Dispensation
you will have two kinds of people, those that believe there is an Administrative Order to follow (whatever that may be), and those who dont want to adhere to regulations or interperetations
there is absolutly ZERO way to convince the latter. even if Baha'u'llah told that person HIMSELF FACE TO FACE, that person would then take Baha'u'llah's words and try to discect what He "really means" and find ANY PSYCHOLOGICAL EXCUSE to "freestyle it"
this is all by the way SEPARATE from Darrick Evanson's original question though
heres the way i see it. and this isnt just about the Current Dispensation but religion in general
religions are given Administrative Orders, all of them, and they vary in degrees.
my stool knows enough about the Prophecy of this Dispensation enough so to know that the weight on the Administrative Order is SO HIGH, in it is in direct relation to the purpose of this Dispensation.
regardless, my point is, that no matter what Dispensation
you will have two kinds of people, those that believe there is an Administrative Order to follow (whatever that may be), and those who dont want to adhere to regulations or interperetations
there is absolutly ZERO way to convince the latter. even if Baha'u'llah told that person HIMSELF FACE TO FACE, that person would then take Baha'u'llah's words and try to discect what He "really means" and find ANY PSYCHOLOGICAL EXCUSE to "freestyle it"
this is all by the way SEPARATE from Darrick Evanson's original question though
Darrick Evanson
by the way Mr. Evanson, i read articles from your site, and i have two things to say
one, keep up the good work with the mormon thing. i wish there were more people like you out there in Utah. try to plan a seminar at BYU or something
also i read "Your story as a Bahai" and i understand part of what you were trying to say and i think you just went about it the wrong way. such information should be processed through the executive line of the Administrative Order (e.i. counselers, ABM)
thats the fast track to Haifa right there
and also, your site is very good, and very well researched, showing your "story" will just counter all that work though, it will discourage people from investigating.
one, keep up the good work with the mormon thing. i wish there were more people like you out there in Utah. try to plan a seminar at BYU or something
also i read "Your story as a Bahai" and i understand part of what you were trying to say and i think you just went about it the wrong way. such information should be processed through the executive line of the Administrative Order (e.i. counselers, ABM)
thats the fast track to Haifa right there
and also, your site is very good, and very well researched, showing your "story" will just counter all that work though, it will discourage people from investigating.
Firmness in the Covenant
Dearest Baha'i Warrior,
I found an interesting quote that may help you understand what being firm in the Covenant really means:
With loving Baha'i regards
I found an interesting quote that may help you understand what being firm in the Covenant really means:
Understanding that God does not want us to turn to "any" man other than His Manifestation is what being firm in the Covenant is all about. And weakness in the Covenant is this childish tendency to exalt other men who are "only" men and turn to them for our understanding rather than using our own God-given faculties, prayer, and the Word of God to guide us.
With loving Baha'i regards
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
"A Covenant in the religious sense is a binding agreement between God and man, whereby God requires of man certain behaviour in return for which He guarantees certain blessings, or whereby He gives man certain bounties in return for which He takes from those who accept them an undertaking to behave in a certain way. There is, for example, the Greater Covenant which every Manifestation of God makes with His followers, promising that in the fulness of time a new Manifestation will be sent, and taking from them the undertaking to accept Him when this occurs. There is also the Lesser Covenant that a Manifestation of God makes with His followers that they will accept His appointed successor after Him. If they do so, the Faith can remain united and pure. If not, the Faith becomes divided and its force spent. It is a Covenant of this kind that Bahá'u'lláh made with His followers regarding 'Abdu'l-Bahá and that 'Abdu'l-Bahá perpetuated through the Administrative Order..."
(23 March 1975, from a letter written by the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer)
___________________________________________________________
"It is incumbent upon the Aghsán, the Afnán and My kindred to turn, one and all, their faces towards the Most Mighty Branch. Consider that which We have revealed in Our Most Holy Book: "When the ocean of My presence hath ebbed and the Book of My Revelation is ended, turn your faces toward Him Whom God hath purposed, Who hath branched from this Ancient Root." The object of this sacred verse is none other except the Most Mighty Branch ('Abdu'l-Bahá). Thus have We graciously revealed unto you our potent Will, and I am verily the Gracious, the All-Powerful."
(Bahá'u'lláh, cited in "The World Order of Bahá'u'lláh - Selected Letters, p. 134)
___________________________________________________________
"Today, the most important affair is firmness in the Covenant, because firmness in the Covenant wards off differences. ....Bahá'u'lláh covenanted, not that I ('Abdu'l-Bahá) am the Promised One, but that 'Abdu'l-Bahá is the Expounder of the Book and the Centre of His Covenant, and that the Promised One of Bahá'u'lláh will appear after one thousand or thousands of years. This is the Covenant which Bahá'u'lláh made. If a person shall deviate, he is not acceptable at the Threshold of Bahá'u'lláh. In case of differences, 'Abdu'l-Bahá must be consulted. They must revolve around his good pleasure. After 'Abdu'l-Bahá, whenever the Universal House of Justice is organized it will ward off differences. "
('Abdu'l-Bahá, cited in "Star of the West", vol. 4, No. 14 (November 1913), p. 237-38)
___________________________________________________________
...the power of the Covenant will protect the Cause of Bahá'u'lláh from the doubts of the people of error. It is the fortified fortress of the Cause of God and the firm pillar of the religion of God. Today no power can conserve the oneness of the Bahá'í world save the Covenant of God; otherwise differences like unto a most great tempest will encompass the Bahá'í world. It is evident that the axis of the oneness of the world of humanity is the power of the Covenant and nothing else.... Therefore, in the beginning the believers must make their steps firm in the Covenant so that the confirmations of Bahá'u'lláh may encircle them from all sides, the cohorts of the Supreme Concourse may become their supporters and helpers, and the exhortations and advices of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, like unto the pictures engraved on stone, may remain permanent and ineffaceable in the tablets of all hearts."
("Tablets of the Divine Plan Revealed by 'Abdu'l-Bahá to the North American Bahá'ís" rev. ed. (Wilmette: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1977), p. 49)
(23 March 1975, from a letter written by the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer)
___________________________________________________________
"It is incumbent upon the Aghsán, the Afnán and My kindred to turn, one and all, their faces towards the Most Mighty Branch. Consider that which We have revealed in Our Most Holy Book: "When the ocean of My presence hath ebbed and the Book of My Revelation is ended, turn your faces toward Him Whom God hath purposed, Who hath branched from this Ancient Root." The object of this sacred verse is none other except the Most Mighty Branch ('Abdu'l-Bahá). Thus have We graciously revealed unto you our potent Will, and I am verily the Gracious, the All-Powerful."
(Bahá'u'lláh, cited in "The World Order of Bahá'u'lláh - Selected Letters, p. 134)
___________________________________________________________
"Today, the most important affair is firmness in the Covenant, because firmness in the Covenant wards off differences. ....Bahá'u'lláh covenanted, not that I ('Abdu'l-Bahá) am the Promised One, but that 'Abdu'l-Bahá is the Expounder of the Book and the Centre of His Covenant, and that the Promised One of Bahá'u'lláh will appear after one thousand or thousands of years. This is the Covenant which Bahá'u'lláh made. If a person shall deviate, he is not acceptable at the Threshold of Bahá'u'lláh. In case of differences, 'Abdu'l-Bahá must be consulted. They must revolve around his good pleasure. After 'Abdu'l-Bahá, whenever the Universal House of Justice is organized it will ward off differences. "
('Abdu'l-Bahá, cited in "Star of the West", vol. 4, No. 14 (November 1913), p. 237-38)
___________________________________________________________
...the power of the Covenant will protect the Cause of Bahá'u'lláh from the doubts of the people of error. It is the fortified fortress of the Cause of God and the firm pillar of the religion of God. Today no power can conserve the oneness of the Bahá'í world save the Covenant of God; otherwise differences like unto a most great tempest will encompass the Bahá'í world. It is evident that the axis of the oneness of the world of humanity is the power of the Covenant and nothing else.... Therefore, in the beginning the believers must make their steps firm in the Covenant so that the confirmations of Bahá'u'lláh may encircle them from all sides, the cohorts of the Supreme Concourse may become their supporters and helpers, and the exhortations and advices of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, like unto the pictures engraved on stone, may remain permanent and ineffaceable in the tablets of all hearts."
("Tablets of the Divine Plan Revealed by 'Abdu'l-Bahá to the North American Bahá'ís" rev. ed. (Wilmette: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1977), p. 49)
Dearest Baha'i Warrior,
You wrote:
So you are following an interpretation of God's Covenant that includes a "lesser" Covenant with men who are "only" men?
Why can't we just follow the "administrative" successor without changing the Covenant with God? Wouldn't we still be united concerning this Greater Covenant if we all followed the "administrative" successor but continued to turn to the Manifestation of God for spiritual matters?
It seems that the Covenant of God was changed by men not for the sake of unity, but to attempt to force interpretations of God's Word by men who are only men on everyone else. This violates this Greater Covenant with God since we are only to follow the Words of the Manifestation, not the lesser words of men who are only men.
I think the problem is trying to view Abdul-Baha as a "spiritual" successor rather than as the "administrative" one that actually was based on his station as "only" a man (Abdul-Baha in London, P.125). A "spiritual" successor to a Manifestation of God can only be another Manifestation of God, and this explains the error in your interpretation of God's Covenant.
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
There is also the Lesser Covenant that a Manifestation of God makes with His followers that they will accept His appointed successor after Him. If they do so, the Faith can remain united and pure. If not, the Faith becomes divided and its force spent. It is a Covenant of this kind that Bahá'u'lláh made with His followers regarding 'Abdu'l-Bahá and that 'Abdu'l-Bahá perpetuated through the Administrative Order..."
So you are following an interpretation of God's Covenant that includes a "lesser" Covenant with men who are "only" men?
Why can't we just follow the "administrative" successor without changing the Covenant with God? Wouldn't we still be united concerning this Greater Covenant if we all followed the "administrative" successor but continued to turn to the Manifestation of God for spiritual matters?
It seems that the Covenant of God was changed by men not for the sake of unity, but to attempt to force interpretations of God's Word by men who are only men on everyone else. This violates this Greater Covenant with God since we are only to follow the Words of the Manifestation, not the lesser words of men who are only men.
I think the problem is trying to view Abdul-Baha as a "spiritual" successor rather than as the "administrative" one that actually was based on his station as "only" a man (Abdul-Baha in London, P.125). A "spiritual" successor to a Manifestation of God can only be another Manifestation of God, and this explains the error in your interpretation of God's Covenant.
With loving Baha'i regards
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
"Ye, however, have broken the Covenant of God, forgotten His Testament, and at last turned away from Him Whose appearance hath solaced the eyes of every true believer in the Divine Unity. Lift up the veils and coverings that obscure your vision, and consider the testimonies of the Prophets and Messengers, that haply ye may recognize the Cause of God in these dayswhen the Promised One hath come invested with a mighty sovereignty. Fear God, and debar yourselves not from Him Who is the Dayspring of His signs. This shall, in truth, but profit your own selves; as to your Lord, He, verily, can afford to dispense with all creatures. From everlasting was He alone; there was none else besides Him. He it is in Whose name the standard of Divine Unity hath been planted upon the Sinai of the visible and invisible worlds, proclaiming that there is none other God but Me, the Peerless, the Glorious, the Incomparable."
I am listening Matt
Dear Matt:
I read your opinions quietly and they seem
fair to me. The question was: should we talk to
covenant breaker (ortodox baha'is). I say: why not ?
An immersed baha'i is protected from all contrary winds,
he is cool in the fire, etc, etc.
After steps (valleys) are crossed, individual minds becomes
stronger, independant, and no sort of wrong or pollution
that could be harmfull to this voyager will pass trough or
derange his well being. I mean he can listen to personal concepts
from humans, but even then, his focus is attached, via the proposed exercices in this wonderful written Revelation, to the direction given by Baha'u'llah, and not the directions expressed by humans.
In most religious movements, some details may scratch our
personal views, but if we bring up positive suggestions, instead of
negative critics, i think it is advantageous to all. Don't we all wish
to ameliorate the conditions of this world ? When i began to learn
to swim, many things did not fit my personal tastes, but with the time
passing by, i realised the sooner i follow what Baha'u'llah wrote for us,
without sterile inner fighting, the happier i am, the better i feel.
Shall we enjoy this discussion with some objectivity ?
I think we all can, inchaa Allah.
Majnun.
I read your opinions quietly and they seem
fair to me. The question was: should we talk to
covenant breaker (ortodox baha'is). I say: why not ?
An immersed baha'i is protected from all contrary winds,
he is cool in the fire, etc, etc.
After steps (valleys) are crossed, individual minds becomes
stronger, independant, and no sort of wrong or pollution
that could be harmfull to this voyager will pass trough or
derange his well being. I mean he can listen to personal concepts
from humans, but even then, his focus is attached, via the proposed exercices in this wonderful written Revelation, to the direction given by Baha'u'llah, and not the directions expressed by humans.
In most religious movements, some details may scratch our
personal views, but if we bring up positive suggestions, instead of
negative critics, i think it is advantageous to all. Don't we all wish
to ameliorate the conditions of this world ? When i began to learn
to swim, many things did not fit my personal tastes, but with the time
passing by, i realised the sooner i follow what Baha'u'llah wrote for us,
without sterile inner fighting, the happier i am, the better i feel.
Shall we enjoy this discussion with some objectivity ?
I think we all can, inchaa Allah.
Majnun.
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
I am not listening Matt
majnun wrote: I read your opinions quietly and they seem
fair to me. The question was: should we talk to
covenant breaker (ortodox baha'is). I say: why not ?
An immersed baha'i is protected from all contrary winds,
he is cool in the fire, etc, etc.
After steps (valleys) are crossed, individual minds becomes
stronger, independant, and no sort of wrong or pollution
that could be harmfull to this voyager will pass trough or
derange his well being. I mean he can listen to personal concepts
from humans, but even then, his focus is attached, via the proposed exercices in this wonderful written Revelation, to the direction given by Baha'u'llah, and not the directions expressed by humans.
oh, yeah, let's invite orthodox baha'is over for tea and crumpets
obviously you've never gone on pilgrimage
otherwise you'd know that close-by is an "orthodox baha'i" church, or whatever you want to call it. hell, i call it "the church of satan." it was made very clear to us to ignore those people, by the house. it was left at that. i'm sure if the concourse on high was circling around the shrine of the Bab, fiends of hell were circling around that "orthodox satan church."
majnun, don't get too comfortable with enemies of the Baha'i Faith. contrary to what you said, baha'is are not as "protected" as you stated, unless we assume every baha'i is equally strong in his faith. there is reason, wisdom, in what the house of justice tells us. weak baha'is are especially vulnerable to fake people, who have a big smile and a “midget” soul. havent you watched those "left behind" christian movies, where satan is this great business man in a suit? he is very convincing. he is polite, such a gentleman. or at least that is what it seems like. beneath that veneer of friendliness is a dark and disturbing truth. the point is, we say prayers for protection. if the prayer had any effect, then you wouldn’t go out and talk to covenant breakers. that’s like praying for protection before throwing yourself into a meat grinder and hoping you wont come out the other end as a hamburger.
im not trying to say im a good baha'i myself or anything, but at least i don't go around attacking the Covenant. every chance i get i teach people about the baha'i faith. it is a very immature thing to think that "true freedom" is in "independent thinking." "true freedom" consists of utter submission to the will of God, submission to His greater and lesser covenants, and obedience to His laws. anyone who does not believe this has gone astray.
people do not realize this, especially in this culture, because it puts such a great emphasis on you as an individual. look at any advertisement and you cannot avoid slogans such as "have it YOUR way." or customize YOUR own computer. or show your individuality and get a green ipod, and color your hair green also, and wear torn jeans. put some loud subwoofers in your trunk and roll down your window. wow, you are so individual, i dont think i ever have seen such a thing before
![augen rollen :roll:](/web/20210423051317im_/https://bahai-library.com/forum/images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
what then happens is people get a false sense of importance, pride, and then think that the world revolves around them. that is very wrong if you read the Writings. Baha'u'llah makes it very clear that every one of us is USELESS if we do not promote His cause, that is, if no one in this world promoted the Baha'i Faith, Baha'u'llah would send others. of course you will have some rotten apples, children who do not know what they are doing, trying to attack His Cause. but they are of no importance, not even worthy of mention, they will die unhappy and there will be no love lost. that’s their fate. (what comes to mind are Koranic images of men being cast into eternal hellfire :twisted: )
Dearest Baha'i Warrior,
You wrote:
You are so full of hate and anger, it is difficult to discern that you are a Baha'i. Why do you hate people who think differently than you do? Are you aware that such intolerance and hate cannot possibly unite the world?
An enemy is someone who will continue to lead you around in circles and never tell you have a veil on and are therefore blinded to the fact that you are going around in circles.
A friend will tell you the truth, even if you have been lied to your entire life. Your friend is more concerned about your lack of progress as you go around in circles, so he will have you lift your veil so you can see where you are going, enabling you to progress down the spiritual road.
Accordingly, when you accuse someone you don't know as being "an enemy of the Faith", step back and ask yourself whether the Faith is moving forward or going around in circles. And if you conclude that it is going around in circles, ask yourself why?
Only then will you be able to properly distinguish between friend and foe, because you would then be in a frame of mind in which you can entertain positive suggestions for progressing down the road.
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
hell, i call it "the church of satan." it was made very clear to us to ignore those people, by the house. it was left at that. i'm sure if the concourse on high was circling around the shrine of the Bab, fiends of hell were circling around that "orthodox satan church."
majnun, don't get too comfortable with enemies of the Baha'i Faith. contrary to what you said, baha'is are not as "protected" as you stated, unless we assume every baha'i is equally strong in his faith. there is reason, wisdom, in what the house of justice tells us. weak baha'is are especially vulnerable to fake people, who have a big smile and a “midget” soul. havent you watched those "left behind" christian movies, where satan is this great business man in a suit? he is very convincing. he is polite, such a gentleman. or at least that is what it seems like. beneath that veneer of friendliness is a dark and disturbing truth. the point is, we say prayers for protection. if the prayer had any effect, then you wouldn’t go out and talk to covenant breakers. that’s like praying for protection before throwing yourself into a meat grinder and hoping you wont come out the other end as a hamburger.
You are so full of hate and anger, it is difficult to discern that you are a Baha'i. Why do you hate people who think differently than you do? Are you aware that such intolerance and hate cannot possibly unite the world?
An enemy is someone who will continue to lead you around in circles and never tell you have a veil on and are therefore blinded to the fact that you are going around in circles.
A friend will tell you the truth, even if you have been lied to your entire life. Your friend is more concerned about your lack of progress as you go around in circles, so he will have you lift your veil so you can see where you are going, enabling you to progress down the spiritual road.
Accordingly, when you accuse someone you don't know as being "an enemy of the Faith", step back and ask yourself whether the Faith is moving forward or going around in circles. And if you conclude that it is going around in circles, ask yourself why?
Only then will you be able to properly distinguish between friend and foe, because you would then be in a frame of mind in which you can entertain positive suggestions for progressing down the road.
With loving Baha'i regards
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
i have forgotten what the Writings say about your enemies. The Master says:
"Among the teachings of Baha'u'llah is one requiring man, under all conditions and circumstances, to be forgiving, to love his enemy and to consider an ill-wisher as a well-wisher. Not that one should consider another as an enemy and then put up with him ... and be forbearing toward him. This is hypocrisy and not real love. Nay, rather, you must see your enemies as friends, your ill-wishers as well-wishers and treat them accordingly. Your love and kindness must be real ... not merely forbearance, for forbearance, if not of the heart, is hypocrisy."
so if i gave the impression that is guy is our enemy, i was wrong and i apologize. i will leave it up to the UHJ to determine who is the enemy. we must love each person, whether or not the UHJ determines him an enemy. but we certainly can love him and at the same time not associate with him. this is in line with the Writings.
"Among the teachings of Baha'u'llah is one requiring man, under all conditions and circumstances, to be forgiving, to love his enemy and to consider an ill-wisher as a well-wisher. Not that one should consider another as an enemy and then put up with him ... and be forbearing toward him. This is hypocrisy and not real love. Nay, rather, you must see your enemies as friends, your ill-wishers as well-wishers and treat them accordingly. Your love and kindness must be real ... not merely forbearance, for forbearance, if not of the heart, is hypocrisy."
so if i gave the impression that is guy is our enemy, i was wrong and i apologize. i will leave it up to the UHJ to determine who is the enemy. we must love each person, whether or not the UHJ determines him an enemy. but we certainly can love him and at the same time not associate with him. this is in line with the Writings.
bagels and crumpets
Hmm, that is a good idea, i didn't had crumpets for
breakfast in years. Bagels either, it gave me tummy aches.
We earthmen have many different views on things, and
these views change with time passing by. I used not to care
to what i drank, but with time, because i know more, i wont
touch Pepsi, even if lost and dying of thisrt in the hot desert of Arizona
filled with deadly scorpions.
Why ? Because i know what is in that product.
Maybe you can make some analogies with most of the
ideas and concepts expressed in here. Some are good, some
less than good to the taste. It may depend on our personal
experiences, and from what we know.
Lets be constructive !
Majnun
breakfast in years. Bagels either, it gave me tummy aches.
We earthmen have many different views on things, and
these views change with time passing by. I used not to care
to what i drank, but with time, because i know more, i wont
touch Pepsi, even if lost and dying of thisrt in the hot desert of Arizona
filled with deadly scorpions.
Why ? Because i know what is in that product.
Maybe you can make some analogies with most of the
ideas and concepts expressed in here. Some are good, some
less than good to the taste. It may depend on our personal
experiences, and from what we know.
Lets be constructive !
Majnun
Dearest Baha'i Warrior,
You wrote:
This is not in the Writings of Baha'u'llah. Shunning of good people that disagree with you is a perversion of the Word of God and guarantees division into sects.
Certainly, it may not be beneficial to spend a lot of time with those who are urging you to do things that harm others and yourself, but you need to sharply distinguish between the evilhearted and those who seek to do that which is good but have come to different conclusions than you have based on the Revelation.
Shunning those who are good and who are oriented toward the uplifting of the spiritual condition of humanity, but who have a different understanding than you do concerning what has been Revealed, runs counter to the goal of real spiritual unity. The inevitable consequence of this sort of shunning is that we will multiply into numerous separate organized groups, each with their own understanding of the Word of God.
One need only look at the history of the Catholic Church, which had instituted a practice of shunning the Protestants, and then ask ourselves whether this shunning hindered or accelerated division?
Martin Luther would have been satisfied had the Pope recognized the right of Christians to read and interpret the Word of God for themselves rather than relying on "Church authority" for one's understanding. But the Pope refused, and one of the greatest and successful efforts to divide the Christian faith was the inevitable consequence.
When will we learn?
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
we certainly can love him and at the same time not associate with him. this is in line with the Writings.
This is not in the Writings of Baha'u'llah. Shunning of good people that disagree with you is a perversion of the Word of God and guarantees division into sects.
Certainly, it may not be beneficial to spend a lot of time with those who are urging you to do things that harm others and yourself, but you need to sharply distinguish between the evilhearted and those who seek to do that which is good but have come to different conclusions than you have based on the Revelation.
Shunning those who are good and who are oriented toward the uplifting of the spiritual condition of humanity, but who have a different understanding than you do concerning what has been Revealed, runs counter to the goal of real spiritual unity. The inevitable consequence of this sort of shunning is that we will multiply into numerous separate organized groups, each with their own understanding of the Word of God.
One need only look at the history of the Catholic Church, which had instituted a practice of shunning the Protestants, and then ask ourselves whether this shunning hindered or accelerated division?
Martin Luther would have been satisfied had the Pope recognized the right of Christians to read and interpret the Word of God for themselves rather than relying on "Church authority" for one's understanding. But the Pope refused, and one of the greatest and successful efforts to divide the Christian faith was the inevitable consequence.
When will we learn?
With loving Baha'i regards
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
as a to-be-doctor, i commend you, majnun. let me tell you, pepsi is poison, as is other carbonated beverages. even diet pepsi is bad for you. obviously the "high fructose corn syrup" (HFCS) in pepsi is trouble. why? first of all, fructose by itself (isolated) is very destructive. your body is not very efficient at processing fructose. however, when you eat a n apple, that has a relatively small (trivial) amount of fructose, and even that fructose is masked by the fiber and other beneficial properties of the apple. now, not only do these scientists isolate this sugar (fructose), but they inject it with an enzyme that converts it to HFCS, and the purpose of this is to make the beverage even sweeter. your liver, instead of breaking down the HFCS and converting it to energy, sends the stuff right to your fat reserves (as adipose tissue). in other words, your body is confused when this stuff it introduced to your system and just sends it down as fat.
and diet pop has its own problems. while it's pH is slightly higher (less acidic) than that of regular soft drinks, it still does contain the phosphoric acid. not enough to do much damage, but over time it does. studies have shown high pop consumption being directly proportional to cases of “Barrets throat” in men (as of the 60s), a condition where the outer lining of the mucosa membrane of your esophagus is wasted away. this can lead to esophageal cancer, but there is some debate about that.
not to mention all the other artificial things they put in there. the FDA’s position is that these fake colors and artificial sweeteners just pass through your system and do nothing, but i'm not convinced. look at "ephedra" (which is back on the market). the FDA was obviously wrong about that. there's a lot of crap out there that we don't know what it does. shop at GNC your whole life and see how long you acutally live. this is why the Baha'i Writings speak of moderation in all things, and not putting medicines into your body when you don't need them. personally, i would even go as far to consider something like creatine monohydrate (a dietary supplement) a medicine, something that is not intended to be in your body at high concentrations, despite the fact that you work out or not. i would say, really, the only supplement that you need is a multivitamin, or other such supplements you doctor might prescribe. personally, i still think it’s better getting the vitamins its source (the real thing) than man-made, processed foods.
anyway, unfortunately not even many doctors recognize this and they are quick to give you a prescription. hell, it's a two way thing. you go to the doctor expecting that he will write you a prescription, and he knows you have this expectation, plus the drug companies pay him a lot for to sell you their product. if we have more Baha'i doctors (that is, educated Baha'i doctors), we will see less deranged mothers driving their kids into the ocean.
(don't get me wrong though, you can still enjoy a pepsi once in a while, like at a Feast, but even then it'd be better to go for the diet)
and diet pop has its own problems. while it's pH is slightly higher (less acidic) than that of regular soft drinks, it still does contain the phosphoric acid. not enough to do much damage, but over time it does. studies have shown high pop consumption being directly proportional to cases of “Barrets throat” in men (as of the 60s), a condition where the outer lining of the mucosa membrane of your esophagus is wasted away. this can lead to esophageal cancer, but there is some debate about that.
not to mention all the other artificial things they put in there. the FDA’s position is that these fake colors and artificial sweeteners just pass through your system and do nothing, but i'm not convinced. look at "ephedra" (which is back on the market). the FDA was obviously wrong about that. there's a lot of crap out there that we don't know what it does. shop at GNC your whole life and see how long you acutally live. this is why the Baha'i Writings speak of moderation in all things, and not putting medicines into your body when you don't need them. personally, i would even go as far to consider something like creatine monohydrate (a dietary supplement) a medicine, something that is not intended to be in your body at high concentrations, despite the fact that you work out or not. i would say, really, the only supplement that you need is a multivitamin, or other such supplements you doctor might prescribe. personally, i still think it’s better getting the vitamins its source (the real thing) than man-made, processed foods.
anyway, unfortunately not even many doctors recognize this and they are quick to give you a prescription. hell, it's a two way thing. you go to the doctor expecting that he will write you a prescription, and he knows you have this expectation, plus the drug companies pay him a lot for to sell you their product. if we have more Baha'i doctors (that is, educated Baha'i doctors), we will see less deranged mothers driving their kids into the ocean.
(don't get me wrong though, you can still enjoy a pepsi once in a while, like at a Feast, but even then it'd be better to go for the diet)
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
Anonymous wrote:Dearest Baha'i Warrior,
You wrote:we certainly can love him and at the same time not associate with him. this is in line with the Writings.
This is not in the Writings of Baha'u'llah. Shunning of good people that disagree with you is a perversion of the Word of God and guarantees division into sects.
Certainly, it may not be beneficial to spend a lot of time with those who are urging you to do things that harm others and yourself, but you need to sharply distinguish between the evilhearted and those who seek to do that which is good but have come to different conclusions than you have based on the Revelation.
Based on the Writings, my friend, I would have to respectfully disagree. First of all, you do not believe in the Lesser Covenant. By your comments, you are undermining the authority of the Baha'i Faith. You say shunning good people will lead to sect formation, and I agree with that. However, I do not think it is the position of the UHJ that those who attack the Covenant are "good people."
In an unpublished letter, the UHJ states:
"While constructive criticism is encouraged, destructive criticism, such as the pattern of "continually challenging and criticizing the decisions" of the Assemblies, prevents the rapid growth of the Faith and repels those who are yet outside the community. Indeed "all criticisms and discussions of a negative character which may result in undermining the authority of the Assembly as a body should be strictly avoided. For otherwise the order of the Cause itself will be endangered, and confusion and discord will reign in the community." "Vicious criticism is indeed a calamity," the root of which is "lack of faith in the system of Bahá'u'lláh" and failure to follow the "Bahá'í laws in voting, in electing, in serving, and in abiding by Assembly decisions."
So, what you are doing is saying is that the lesser Covenant does not rest with the UHJ. That, my friend, will lead to sect formation, not people like me not wanting to associate with people like you. Obviously, I am not shunning you, and I never used the word. You can be polite and still avoid a person you know that is bitter toward the Faith.
Plus, apparently you disenrolled. If you had problems, you could have taken them to the proper Authorities.
The beloved Guardian (quoted in this same letter), says:
"Without the spirit of real love for Bahá'u'lláh, for His Faith and its Institutions, and the believers for each other, the Cause can never really bring in large numbers of people. For it is not preaching and rules the world wants, but love and action."
So, from what I have read in the Writings, wisdom is always an important factor of spirituality. It is not wise to debate or listen to the position of someone who is bitter toward the Faith and only aims at undermining its Authority. This is unwise. Again, I can love you because God created you (just as I can love Covenant breakers or serial killers), but I am under no obligation to associate with this type, and the quotes I posted above prove this. Again, if you had criticism, as a Baha'i you should have taken it to the right place. You did not, and you disenrolled. That is fine, but there is nothing the Writings that says I am obligated to associate with you. Try to prove me wrong, but it will be of no use.
Would it be a better use of my time teaching others about the Faith of Baha'u'llah, or would it be better associating with people who are unhappy with the Faith? Besides, I am talking to you right now, am I not? That's not shunning you. Maybe one day when I am finished with school, I will compile a bunch of attacks of Covenant breakers and the like, and form my own response to those attacks. Baha'u'llah Himself says that anyone who raises his pen to defend His Faith, has done it great service. Man, that would feel really good!! That's what I really want, to publish something that will cancel out a few of these attacks. So, there, that's proof I'm not ignoring you guys!
![big grin :D](/web/20210423051317im_/https://bahai-library.com/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
—Warrior
Dearest Baha'i Warrior,
You wrote:
I have no bitterness toward the Faith, and I consulted with ABMs, Regional Council members and even a NSA member before disenrolling.
Through all of this consultation I learned that I had been duped, that the definition of being Baha'i as articulated by Baha'u'llah in His Book of the Covenant no longer applied, and that now one must have "unreserved acceptance to every word uttered by "Abdul-Baha" in order to be a Baha'i. Because I have many reservations about some of the words uttered by Abdul-Baha, I did the only thing an honest man can do, which is to resign.
This does not make me bitter or an "enemy of the Faith", and I have no aim to undermine the authority of the Faith. My only aim is to seek the truth of the Word of God. If my truth seeking bothers those in positions of authority in the Baha'i Faith, then that tells me that the Faith has something to hide, has lost its spiritual compass, and is no longer following the spirit of Baha'u'llah.
So-called “lesser” Covenants with men are the invention of men who are "only" men, not the Words of Baha'u'llah. The fact that I have merely pointed this out does not make me a bad person, it makes me an honest man with an honest disagreement about the true meaning of the Covenant with God. God has no partners and no associates; there is none other god beside God. Understanding the truth of this sacred phrase requires us to give up these lesser Covenants with men and renew our Greater Covenant with God.
If the UHJ cannot govern the Baha'i Faith without pretending to be infallible or pretending to be at the center of the Covenant with God, then what does that say about their spiritual leadership? Certainly any spiritual person can discern whether one is leading us closer to God or not. So as long as one is pre-occupied with the business of leading us closer to God by facilitating the cultivation of all of the wondrous virtues of God in the broader community, why do we need a lesser Covenant?
If my heart and intentions are sincere, I do not need you to have a lesser Covenant with me to lead you to God. I only need this invention if I am trying to fool you, trying lead you astray, or take your money, because I can then play guilt trips on you about obeying the lesser Covenant to have my way with you.
Lead by positive example and with a pure heart, and those who are spiritually inclined will follow. This is the only authority you need, all other authority is vested with God.
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
It is not wise to debate or listen to the position of someone who is bitter toward the Faith and only aims at undermining its Authority.
I have no bitterness toward the Faith, and I consulted with ABMs, Regional Council members and even a NSA member before disenrolling.
Through all of this consultation I learned that I had been duped, that the definition of being Baha'i as articulated by Baha'u'llah in His Book of the Covenant no longer applied, and that now one must have "unreserved acceptance to every word uttered by "Abdul-Baha" in order to be a Baha'i. Because I have many reservations about some of the words uttered by Abdul-Baha, I did the only thing an honest man can do, which is to resign.
This does not make me bitter or an "enemy of the Faith", and I have no aim to undermine the authority of the Faith. My only aim is to seek the truth of the Word of God. If my truth seeking bothers those in positions of authority in the Baha'i Faith, then that tells me that the Faith has something to hide, has lost its spiritual compass, and is no longer following the spirit of Baha'u'llah.
So-called “lesser” Covenants with men are the invention of men who are "only" men, not the Words of Baha'u'llah. The fact that I have merely pointed this out does not make me a bad person, it makes me an honest man with an honest disagreement about the true meaning of the Covenant with God. God has no partners and no associates; there is none other god beside God. Understanding the truth of this sacred phrase requires us to give up these lesser Covenants with men and renew our Greater Covenant with God.
If the UHJ cannot govern the Baha'i Faith without pretending to be infallible or pretending to be at the center of the Covenant with God, then what does that say about their spiritual leadership? Certainly any spiritual person can discern whether one is leading us closer to God or not. So as long as one is pre-occupied with the business of leading us closer to God by facilitating the cultivation of all of the wondrous virtues of God in the broader community, why do we need a lesser Covenant?
If my heart and intentions are sincere, I do not need you to have a lesser Covenant with me to lead you to God. I only need this invention if I am trying to fool you, trying lead you astray, or take your money, because I can then play guilt trips on you about obeying the lesser Covenant to have my way with you.
Lead by positive example and with a pure heart, and those who are spiritually inclined will follow. This is the only authority you need, all other authority is vested with God.
With loving Baha'i regards
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
Anonymous wrote: Through all of this consultation I learned that I had been duped, that the definition of being Baha'i as articulated by Baha'u'llah in His Book of the Covenant no longer applied, and that now one must have "unreserved acceptance to every word uttered by "Abdul-Baha" in order to be a Baha'i. Because I have many reservations about some of the words uttered by Abdul-Baha, I did the only thing an honest man can do, which is to resign.
You said: "that the definition of being Baha'i as articulated by Baha'u'llah in His Book of the Covenant no longer applied." My question is: Since when? What is this "definition" you are referring to, and how has it "changed"? You might want to expand on that.
That is illogical, that you would have "reservations about some of the words uttered by Abdul-Baha." 'Abdu'l-Baha was the Expounder of the Baha'i Faith; He did not make up new laws or say anything that would contradict Baha'u'llah. He just built on what Baha'u'llah said and clarified some things, as did Shoghi Effendi. If you read the Writings of Baha'u'llah and His Son, you will note different "tones," if you like, but by no means did They say different things or make any contradictions. So I don't see what your problem is.
Anonymous wrote: My only aim is to seek the truth of the Word of God.
That is the first step. However, you pledge allegiance to Baha'u'llah, but you shun His Covenant, and in fact you say it is illegitimate. There is always a possibility that you are not so innocent. Baha'u'llah warns us (me, majnun, Jonah, everyone on this message board):
"Time and again have We admonished Our beloved ones to avoid, nay to flee from, anything whatsoever from which the odor of mischief can be detected."
-Gleanings XLIII
You must know this quote, right? Supposedly you believe in Baha'u'llah, yet you contradict yourself when you say,
Anonymous wrote: Shunning those who are good and who are oriented toward the uplifting of the spiritual condition of humanity, but who have a different understanding than you do concerning what has been Revealed, runs counter to the goal of real spiritual unity
Wrong. According to Baha'u'llah, at least. Therefore, if you:
1) Do not believe in the Lesser Covenant (in which case that INVALIDATES your "belief" in the Greater Covenant and in Baha'u'llah, sorry to break it to you)
2) Post on message boards with no other objective than to get people to think "your way" and in the process cause disunity (yes, disunity of thought is disunity i.e. you not believing in something we hold sacred)
3) Call those under the Lesser Covenant, and the Lesser Covenant itself "fake," ordinaries, or (your favorite) “men who are only men”
then I am totally within my rights NOT to agree with you, and NOT to associate with you. In fact, Baha'u'llah gives me the permission to SHUN you if I smell mischief! Read the quote again yourself. Now, I have pretty good grounds for thinking this mischief, eh? If not, what do you call mischief? Posting on message boards defending Baha'u'llah's Covenant (and in the process, Himself)?
So I hope Baha'u'llah forgives me for continuing on with this, though I smell mischief. Maybe it can be reconciled with the other quote, that I'm defending my Faith? Maybe to a very small extent...
_____
Also, just to the Baha'is here: Don't be afraid to defend your Faith! Baha'u'llah says:
"If any man were to arise to defend, in his writings, the Cause of God against its assailants, such a man, however inconsiderable his share, shall be so honored in the world to come that the Concourse on high would envy his glory." (Gleanings CLIV).
Yes, you read that correctly! "shall be so honored in the world to come that the Concourse on high would envy his glory."
—Warrior
Dearest Baha'i Warrior,
You wrote:
I thought you remembered this from a previous post. Here it is again:
So when the UHJ changes the definition of being Baha'i to something entirely different than what was expressed above by Baha'u'llah, then they are disrespecting a Manifestation of God in their quest to have men follow men who are only men.
You also wrote:
Wrong.
Again, the words of Baha'u'llah:
So when Abdul-Baha tells us its OK to discriminate against women on the UHJ, he is ascribing to women a condition he would not ascribe to men, and has therefore violated the command of God as Revealed by Baha'u'llah.
How more contradictory can you be concerning a fundamental issue of the Faith than a blatant violation of one of the central commands of God, the Golden Rule, which has been Revealed in every Dispensation of God, including this one?
You try to construe truth seeking as mischief to justify your turning your back on the loved ones of God, but who do you really think will be harmed by turning your back on the truth? The truth-seekers certainly will not be harmed by this, only you will be harmed.
More of your words:
Truth seeking can never be regarded as mischief, otherwise falsehoods will have a free reign on the human soul. The "mischief maker" (I'm sure you know who that is) wants to make the truth secondary or irrelevant so he can continue to spread lies and mischief. So when you pretend unity is the foundation of all other virtues of God when we all know the truth is the foundation of these virtues, who are you trying to fool, yourself?
Finally, you quote Baha'ullah as saying:
Notice, that Baha'u'llah is referring to the "Cause of God", not the cause of men who are "only" men.
So pay close attention to whose cause you are really defending. Otherwise, instead of glory, you may find yourself roasting in the fire with the mischief maker.
With loving Baha'i regards,
-Matt
You wrote:
My question is: Since when? What is this "definition" you are referring to, and how has it "changed"? You might want to expand on that.
I thought you remembered this from a previous post. Here it is again:
Every receptive soul who hath in this Day inhaled the fragrance of His garment and hath, with a pure heart, set his face towards the all-glorious Horizon is reckoned among the people of Bahá in the Crimson Book. - Baha'u'llah, Book of the Covenant
So when the UHJ changes the definition of being Baha'i to something entirely different than what was expressed above by Baha'u'llah, then they are disrespecting a Manifestation of God in their quest to have men follow men who are only men.
You also wrote:
'Abdu'l-Baha was the Expounder of the Baha'i Faith; He did not make up new laws or say anything that would contradict Baha'u'llah.
Wrong.
Again, the words of Baha'u'llah:
"Ascribe not to any soul that which thou wouldst not have ascribed to thee, and say not that which thou doest not. This is My command unto thee, do thou observe it." - Baha'u'llah, Hidden Words, 29
So when Abdul-Baha tells us its OK to discriminate against women on the UHJ, he is ascribing to women a condition he would not ascribe to men, and has therefore violated the command of God as Revealed by Baha'u'llah.
How more contradictory can you be concerning a fundamental issue of the Faith than a blatant violation of one of the central commands of God, the Golden Rule, which has been Revealed in every Dispensation of God, including this one?
You try to construe truth seeking as mischief to justify your turning your back on the loved ones of God, but who do you really think will be harmed by turning your back on the truth? The truth-seekers certainly will not be harmed by this, only you will be harmed.
More of your words:
Now, I have pretty good grounds for thinking this mischief, eh? If not, what do you call mischief?
Truth seeking can never be regarded as mischief, otherwise falsehoods will have a free reign on the human soul. The "mischief maker" (I'm sure you know who that is) wants to make the truth secondary or irrelevant so he can continue to spread lies and mischief. So when you pretend unity is the foundation of all other virtues of God when we all know the truth is the foundation of these virtues, who are you trying to fool, yourself?
Finally, you quote Baha'ullah as saying:
"If any man were to arise to defend, in his writings, the <b>Cause of God</b> against its assailants, such a man, however inconsiderable his share, shall be so honored in the world to come that the Concourse on high would envy his glory." (Gleanings CLIV).
Notice, that Baha'u'llah is referring to the "Cause of God", not the cause of men who are "only" men.
So pay close attention to whose cause you are really defending. Otherwise, instead of glory, you may find yourself roasting in the fire with the mischief maker.
With loving Baha'i regards,
-Matt
Dearest Baha'i Warrior,
Baha'ullah had a similar concern about those who are unable to distinguish between a mischief maker and a reformer. Here are His Words:
With loving Baha'i regards
Baha'ullah had a similar concern about those who are unable to distinguish between a mischief maker and a reformer. Here are His Words:
Thus have they pronounced judgement against Us, and God, truly, is aware of what I say. Such men are reckoned by God among the most ignorant of His creatures. They cut off their own limbs and perceive it not; they deprive themselves of that which is best for them, and know it not. They are even as a young child who can distinguish neither the mischief-maker from the reformer nor the wicked from the righteous. We behold them in this Day wrapt in a palpable veil. - Baha'ullah, Súriy-i-Haykal
With loving Baha'i regards
This may help clear things up.
""So when the UHJ changes the definition of being Baha'i to something entirely different than what was expressed above by Baha'u'llah, then they are disrespecting a Manifestation of God in their quest to have men follow men who are only men.""
Lets make this simple Bahaullah bestows leadership of the Faith to Abdul-Baha, Abdul-Baha passes on leadership to Shoghi Effendi. He dies and the hands of the cause bring about the election of the UHJ. Which is given authority by, Bahai Scriptures. In case your wondering the Bahai scriptures were written by Bahaullah. So UHJ=Institution guided by God. (< refers to the less than symbol) men<Body/group of Men guided by God(sanctioned by God's latest Messenger on earth) So therefore UHJ>
group of men. The Universal House of Justice is not a normal group of men.
""
So when Abdul-Baha tells us its OK to discriminate against women on the UHJ, he is ascribing to women a condition he would not ascribe to men, and has therefore violated the command of God as Revealed by Baha'u'llah.
""
If we used your method of analyzin the Hidden Words we could make up any meaning. the next Hidden word says "Deny not my servant should he ask anything of thee" So by using your reasoning if a guy asked me to kill
Big Bird it would be sanctioned by the Holy Writings. God Forbid! Bahaullah in other passages clearly forbids me to kill people. So I know that my previous interpretation was wrong. Remember Bahaullah appoints Abdul-Baha as an infallible interpreter of the Holy Writings. So if Abdul-Baha says something. And I read another piece of writing and my interpretation of it contradicts Abdul-Baha, I know I am wrong. It seems have an issue with the appointed Authority of the Faith after Bahaullah.
There is only one God and Muhammad is His Prophet.
Lets make this simple Bahaullah bestows leadership of the Faith to Abdul-Baha, Abdul-Baha passes on leadership to Shoghi Effendi. He dies and the hands of the cause bring about the election of the UHJ. Which is given authority by, Bahai Scriptures. In case your wondering the Bahai scriptures were written by Bahaullah. So UHJ=Institution guided by God. (< refers to the less than symbol) men<Body/group of Men guided by God(sanctioned by God's latest Messenger on earth) So therefore UHJ>
group of men. The Universal House of Justice is not a normal group of men.
""
"Ascribe not to any soul that which thou wouldst not have ascribed to thee, and say not that which thou doest not. This is My command unto thee, do thou observe it." - Baha'u'llah, Hidden Words, 29
So when Abdul-Baha tells us its OK to discriminate against women on the UHJ, he is ascribing to women a condition he would not ascribe to men, and has therefore violated the command of God as Revealed by Baha'u'llah.
""
If we used your method of analyzin the Hidden Words we could make up any meaning. the next Hidden word says "Deny not my servant should he ask anything of thee" So by using your reasoning if a guy asked me to kill
Big Bird it would be sanctioned by the Holy Writings. God Forbid! Bahaullah in other passages clearly forbids me to kill people. So I know that my previous interpretation was wrong. Remember Bahaullah appoints Abdul-Baha as an infallible interpreter of the Holy Writings. So if Abdul-Baha says something. And I read another piece of writing and my interpretation of it contradicts Abdul-Baha, I know I am wrong. It seems have an issue with the appointed Authority of the Faith after Bahaullah.
There is only one God and Muhammad is His Prophet.
Dearest Rasta,
You wrote:
One does not need to be an "infallible sole interpreter of the Word of God" in order to lead the Baha'i Faith.
You also said:
It is "hoped" that they are the best spiritual beings that we have, but the lack of direct elections of the House and the discrimination against women makes that doubtful. Also, if Abdul-Baha informs us he is "only" a man like you and me (Abdul-Baha in London, P.125), how can he appoint other men who are to be regarded as "more than" men?
You quoted a different Hidden Word as saying:
This is not the Hidden Word that I quoted in previous posts that deals with Abdul-Baha's disobedience. Obviously, you can only give that which is seemly and good according to the rest of the commands of God. But when God specifically commands you from the beginning of time to treat everyone in the manner that you would like to be treated, and you violate this command by discriminating against women in the leadership of the Faith, you are challenging God and disobeying His Manifestation, and it is therefore a mistake to follow this human error on the part of Abdul-Baha because we cannot hide behind Abdul-Baha on Judgment Day since God will remind us: "Didn't I tell you not to join any partners with me? "
Verily, there is none other god beside God, the Self-Subsisting, the All-Sufficing.
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
Lets make this simple Bahaullah bestows leadership of the Faith to Abdul-Baha, Abdul-Baha passes on leadership to Shoghi Effendi
One does not need to be an "infallible sole interpreter of the Word of God" in order to lead the Baha'i Faith.
You also said:
The Universal House of Justice is not a normal group of men.
It is "hoped" that they are the best spiritual beings that we have, but the lack of direct elections of the House and the discrimination against women makes that doubtful. Also, if Abdul-Baha informs us he is "only" a man like you and me (Abdul-Baha in London, P.125), how can he appoint other men who are to be regarded as "more than" men?
You quoted a different Hidden Word as saying:
"the next Hidden word says "Deny not my servant should he ask anything of thee
This is not the Hidden Word that I quoted in previous posts that deals with Abdul-Baha's disobedience. Obviously, you can only give that which is seemly and good according to the rest of the commands of God. But when God specifically commands you from the beginning of time to treat everyone in the manner that you would like to be treated, and you violate this command by discriminating against women in the leadership of the Faith, you are challenging God and disobeying His Manifestation, and it is therefore a mistake to follow this human error on the part of Abdul-Baha because we cannot hide behind Abdul-Baha on Judgment Day since God will remind us: "Didn't I tell you not to join any partners with me? "
Verily, there is none other god beside God, the Self-Subsisting, the All-Sufficing.
With loving Baha'i regards
Dearest Baha'i Warrior,
You wrote:
While it is true that women have made great strides in the Faith, the fact that there is a glass ceiling set by a man who is "only" a man should trouble anyone who wants to obey God's command (not Abdul-Baha'is command) to not ascribe a condition to those that you would not ascribe to yourself. And a discriminatory condition that only applies to women concerning membership on the UHJ is a violation of the command of God.
The "test" that Abdul-Baha was referring to is whether you are going to follow God or follow him. Obviously, as a Faith, we have failed this test.
You also wrote:
If you recall, idol worship, man worship, animal worship, or any other worship other than God has been attacked by "every" Manifestation of God, including Baha'u'llah. The fact that you are repeating the same errors of the past by ascribing partners with God is truly sad since we all know God has no partners and no associates; there is none other god beside God, the Self-Subsisting, the All-Sufficing.
With loving Baha'i regards
You wrote:
So don't give me that bilge that the Faith discriminates against women.
While it is true that women have made great strides in the Faith, the fact that there is a glass ceiling set by a man who is "only" a man should trouble anyone who wants to obey God's command (not Abdul-Baha'is command) to not ascribe a condition to those that you would not ascribe to yourself. And a discriminatory condition that only applies to women concerning membership on the UHJ is a violation of the command of God.
The "test" that Abdul-Baha was referring to is whether you are going to follow God or follow him. Obviously, as a Faith, we have failed this test.
You also wrote:
Baha'u'llah is going to embrace you with open arms and say: "My son, you were right! All the other Baha'is were wrong! There was really only a Greater Covenant. You did Me a great service by attacking the Lesser Covenant!"
If you recall, idol worship, man worship, animal worship, or any other worship other than God has been attacked by "every" Manifestation of God, including Baha'u'llah. The fact that you are repeating the same errors of the past by ascribing partners with God is truly sad since we all know God has no partners and no associates; there is none other god beside God, the Self-Subsisting, the All-Sufficing.
With loving Baha'i regards
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
Pepsi in hospitals !
.
Dear friends (Matt, Warrior and Keyvan, and others).
Warrior you are very right concerning Pepsi. There are so
many dangerous products out there, if we the people only knew the consequences, we would stop drinking or eating those things. What worries me is that Coke and Pepsi give millions of dollars, EVERY YEAR, to schools, to get the exclusivity and the right to install their vending-machines all over the place. Here in Quebec,
Pepsi apply the same "satanic" [sic] strategy to hospitals. To hospitals ! Just picture the contrast battle of health and malady.
Prior to this our friend Warrior mentioned that westerners are somehow
inclined to follow publicities that make them wish for things they dont really need. YES, warrior is right again, and most publicity trick people.
This is why i like to read Warriors text, most of the time he is objective and "right on the button".
I suggest that for most baha'is who reached the "tauhid" state, the relationship they have with images (visual, sonic or otherwise) is profoundly altered (changed) and that most of these more "solid" baha'is are sort of immuned to any publicity tricks. Images have no real power on a baha'ised conscience.
another topic
Concerning the argruments we all presented here, concerning the
covenant and communications between people, i think we are going
on the "ordinary" track. By this i mean that Messenger Baha'u'llah clearly showed us (in valley 1, 2, 3) how we all express ourselves (our opinions, our inner possessions) with 3 distorted ways :
1- the parental inherithed, the traditional way,
2- the affective, the emotional, or passionate way,
3- the projective, or jugemental way.
Most of the people we hear use those 3 separate ways, mainly
because they cannot acheive the united (or re-united, = tauhid)
way resulting from the reunification of these 3 limiting manners.
This fact is verifiable daily on all tv shows, and at the begining of
valley 4, the Messenger says that while people are doing this unconsciously, it generate conflicts in the world. (it means: between the people of this world, "in the world", not in the whole wide world)
(wrongly translated by Gail as: conflict continally appears on earth)
The word Elam does not mean "the earth", but either world or, learned man.
You know this from many tablets:
al-ardh = the earth
al-dunya = the world (as : the whole world).
I think our dialog, from the start, has been expressed trought these 3 separate ways, therefore without "detachement", therefore showing a bad example of how to do, to others that read us. We should correct this and continue on a joyfull note, without accusations (in reality: projections).
Disenrollement
To enroll or disenroll is a personal decision. How can i risk any comment,
especially on the back of a person i do not know ? Im thinking about a great collaborator, who, for personal reasons, disenrolled. Mr Juan Cole is a professional translator who made availuable many tablets that are still unpublished in english, and the quality of his work is impressive. I mean he translate a text like it is, with honesty, with no additions, and the result is an easy to understand text in english. His profound knowledge of persian and arabic is most likely better than yours and mine, and many
older members who met him will tell you how a nice person he is, and how intelligent Mr Cole is. Just read the tablet "the River", or "the Vision", "the Companions" or so many others he translated, and you will appreciate the clarity of the texts. They are not "peppered" with complicated terms, nor decorated by divinising florishes.
A long list of well translated tablets (dated) will be appreciated by all, and they are accessible on this Acacemic website.
His personal contribution for this Cause is as great (or more) as the effort done by the Taharnazeh brothers, to the benefit of all english speaking baha'is. I dont care if he disenrolled or not. I thank him publically for making these wonderfull parts of the scriptures known, well translated and availuable. We cannot juge him because he decided to disenroll. Mr Cole, thank you for the effort you've done for us, you are a great Friend.
Breakers
Concerning the breakers, ahh, what a spiky topic.
When we come into a new religion, we dont need to hear right away about
inner fights that happend between members of the family of Baha'u'llah at the moment of his departure. We are new to all this, and we are sick, without fully knowing it. We are in need of THE remedy, of that written remedy. Many years will pass before we digest it completely and become cured (spiritually). The spiritual "healing" program is made availuable to the world (= the people of the world) and what else can we do than to pass it on to our immediate neighbours who are certainly as sick as we were.
Will i be considered a "breaker" if i dont go to prayers every sunday morrnings ?
(I like to sleep on sunday mornings)
Or if i say to others, ah, i wont give children's classes ?
(I feel i am too old for that kind of stuff)
Or if i say to others, ah, the Ruhi vegetable soup, i dont like it ?
(I gave my view on that already)
Or if i say, i wont go to pilgrimage to Haifa, it is not a necessity.
Or if i say, it is okay to sleep naked.
Or if i say, Meher Baba offers a similar program to ours ?
Or if i say, prophet Raël offers our program, plus some nice extra features ?
If this would be the case, i dont give a D.
Baha'is are made to think by themselves, to see by themselves, so does
the program tells us right from the start.
I will follow Baha'u'llah's program, whatever other people say, or do, or think. There is enough material (jewels of wisdoms) in Baha'u'llah's writings for a lifetime of every day learning. Therfore, ,ay I picture Abdul Baha's and Shogi Effendi's writings as being "the icing on the cake" ?
Is not uniting all religions a main topic of our program ?
How can we unite if we constantly spike at each others troat ?
You may have guest it, i "love" this program.
Majnun.
Dear friends (Matt, Warrior and Keyvan, and others).
Warrior you are very right concerning Pepsi. There are so
many dangerous products out there, if we the people only knew the consequences, we would stop drinking or eating those things. What worries me is that Coke and Pepsi give millions of dollars, EVERY YEAR, to schools, to get the exclusivity and the right to install their vending-machines all over the place. Here in Quebec,
Pepsi apply the same "satanic" [sic] strategy to hospitals. To hospitals ! Just picture the contrast battle of health and malady.
Prior to this our friend Warrior mentioned that westerners are somehow
inclined to follow publicities that make them wish for things they dont really need. YES, warrior is right again, and most publicity trick people.
This is why i like to read Warriors text, most of the time he is objective and "right on the button".
I suggest that for most baha'is who reached the "tauhid" state, the relationship they have with images (visual, sonic or otherwise) is profoundly altered (changed) and that most of these more "solid" baha'is are sort of immuned to any publicity tricks. Images have no real power on a baha'ised conscience.
another topic
Concerning the argruments we all presented here, concerning the
covenant and communications between people, i think we are going
on the "ordinary" track. By this i mean that Messenger Baha'u'llah clearly showed us (in valley 1, 2, 3) how we all express ourselves (our opinions, our inner possessions) with 3 distorted ways :
1- the parental inherithed, the traditional way,
2- the affective, the emotional, or passionate way,
3- the projective, or jugemental way.
Most of the people we hear use those 3 separate ways, mainly
because they cannot acheive the united (or re-united, = tauhid)
way resulting from the reunification of these 3 limiting manners.
This fact is verifiable daily on all tv shows, and at the begining of
valley 4, the Messenger says that while people are doing this unconsciously, it generate conflicts in the world. (it means: between the people of this world, "in the world", not in the whole wide world)
(wrongly translated by Gail as: conflict continally appears on earth)
The word Elam does not mean "the earth", but either world or, learned man.
You know this from many tablets:
al-ardh = the earth
al-dunya = the world (as : the whole world).
I think our dialog, from the start, has been expressed trought these 3 separate ways, therefore without "detachement", therefore showing a bad example of how to do, to others that read us. We should correct this and continue on a joyfull note, without accusations (in reality: projections).
Disenrollement
To enroll or disenroll is a personal decision. How can i risk any comment,
especially on the back of a person i do not know ? Im thinking about a great collaborator, who, for personal reasons, disenrolled. Mr Juan Cole is a professional translator who made availuable many tablets that are still unpublished in english, and the quality of his work is impressive. I mean he translate a text like it is, with honesty, with no additions, and the result is an easy to understand text in english. His profound knowledge of persian and arabic is most likely better than yours and mine, and many
older members who met him will tell you how a nice person he is, and how intelligent Mr Cole is. Just read the tablet "the River", or "the Vision", "the Companions" or so many others he translated, and you will appreciate the clarity of the texts. They are not "peppered" with complicated terms, nor decorated by divinising florishes.
A long list of well translated tablets (dated) will be appreciated by all, and they are accessible on this Acacemic website.
His personal contribution for this Cause is as great (or more) as the effort done by the Taharnazeh brothers, to the benefit of all english speaking baha'is. I dont care if he disenrolled or not. I thank him publically for making these wonderfull parts of the scriptures known, well translated and availuable. We cannot juge him because he decided to disenroll. Mr Cole, thank you for the effort you've done for us, you are a great Friend.
Breakers
Concerning the breakers, ahh, what a spiky topic.
When we come into a new religion, we dont need to hear right away about
inner fights that happend between members of the family of Baha'u'llah at the moment of his departure. We are new to all this, and we are sick, without fully knowing it. We are in need of THE remedy, of that written remedy. Many years will pass before we digest it completely and become cured (spiritually). The spiritual "healing" program is made availuable to the world (= the people of the world) and what else can we do than to pass it on to our immediate neighbours who are certainly as sick as we were.
Will i be considered a "breaker" if i dont go to prayers every sunday morrnings ?
(I like to sleep on sunday mornings)
Or if i say to others, ah, i wont give children's classes ?
(I feel i am too old for that kind of stuff)
Or if i say to others, ah, the Ruhi vegetable soup, i dont like it ?
(I gave my view on that already)
Or if i say, i wont go to pilgrimage to Haifa, it is not a necessity.
Or if i say, it is okay to sleep naked.
Or if i say, Meher Baba offers a similar program to ours ?
Or if i say, prophet Raël offers our program, plus some nice extra features ?
If this would be the case, i dont give a D.
Baha'is are made to think by themselves, to see by themselves, so does
the program tells us right from the start.
I will follow Baha'u'llah's program, whatever other people say, or do, or think. There is enough material (jewels of wisdoms) in Baha'u'llah's writings for a lifetime of every day learning. Therfore, ,ay I picture Abdul Baha's and Shogi Effendi's writings as being "the icing on the cake" ?
Is not uniting all religions a main topic of our program ?
How can we unite if we constantly spike at each others troat ?
You may have guest it, i "love" this program.
Majnun.
bit of a rant
I'm not a Baha'i. I might have become one if it were a more normal religion, but you guys are a bit too cultic for me. I just can't believe that God acts the way you guys think he does.
Like, damning people (basically) for picking the wrong side of some Middle Eastern dynastic struggle? I suppose they were expected to use their expert knowledge of inheritance law (which is international!) to decide which brother was the right messiah...? Or just pick some leader to agree with, and hope for the best...?
News flash: Your "covenant breakers" do not think they are covenant breakers. Many of them are people very much like you--a bit strident perhaps, sometimes cranky, but not evil. The major difference is that way back in history, your side won the battle for numbers, and theirs didn't. (But then, you all lost against Islam.)
And a lot of people who get slapped with that label are really just your own dissidents. Ask yourself--why are your leaders so quick to get rid of people who do something to challenge their entrenched positions? I guess that question pretty much answers itself, doesn't it. (And don't tell me about Baha'i "democracy." You're about as democratic as Iraq.)
As I see things, the "covenant" is all about power. It's about who gets to spend all that money in Haifa, and who doesn't. This "unity" must be very convenient to the folks who run things, but I'm quite sure that God doesn't give a damn for it. It's a covenant that deserves breaking.
Don't get me wrong--I think Baha'i has a lot of good teachings. But in the end, the negative (of having an authoritarian religion) outweighs the positive. You talk about spiritual evolution, but once you get past the "principles" lists and look at laws, which of these would be considered progressive by anybody but the Baha'is?
Dialogue? Argument? As a group, I doubt that you're capable of doing anything but nod politely, and then throw up a brick wall before anything that fundamentally challenges your beliefs. (Maybe I too suffer from faults like these, but then, I'm not claiming to represent the future of humanity.)
Like, damning people (basically) for picking the wrong side of some Middle Eastern dynastic struggle? I suppose they were expected to use their expert knowledge of inheritance law (which is international!) to decide which brother was the right messiah...? Or just pick some leader to agree with, and hope for the best...?
News flash: Your "covenant breakers" do not think they are covenant breakers. Many of them are people very much like you--a bit strident perhaps, sometimes cranky, but not evil. The major difference is that way back in history, your side won the battle for numbers, and theirs didn't. (But then, you all lost against Islam.)
And a lot of people who get slapped with that label are really just your own dissidents. Ask yourself--why are your leaders so quick to get rid of people who do something to challenge their entrenched positions? I guess that question pretty much answers itself, doesn't it. (And don't tell me about Baha'i "democracy." You're about as democratic as Iraq.)
As I see things, the "covenant" is all about power. It's about who gets to spend all that money in Haifa, and who doesn't. This "unity" must be very convenient to the folks who run things, but I'm quite sure that God doesn't give a damn for it. It's a covenant that deserves breaking.
Don't get me wrong--I think Baha'i has a lot of good teachings. But in the end, the negative (of having an authoritarian religion) outweighs the positive. You talk about spiritual evolution, but once you get past the "principles" lists and look at laws, which of these would be considered progressive by anybody but the Baha'is?
Dialogue? Argument? As a group, I doubt that you're capable of doing anything but nod politely, and then throw up a brick wall before anything that fundamentally challenges your beliefs. (Maybe I too suffer from faults like these, but then, I'm not claiming to represent the future of humanity.)
Hi Mitch
Nice critique Mitch. Nothing is perfect in this world, but
what religion are you going to pick up now ?
I ask this question because your letter starts with
a line mentioning that your personal choice is based on
us being too "cultic" for you, so we feel so guilty, so hurt,
so deeply amazed that maybe we are going to wait another
wonderful letter from you to show us the way.
What do you think about the sale of Pepsi in schools and hospitals ?
What do you think about Pakistan and Iran making atomic bombs ?
Majnun.
what religion are you going to pick up now ?
I ask this question because your letter starts with
a line mentioning that your personal choice is based on
us being too "cultic" for you, so we feel so guilty, so hurt,
so deeply amazed that maybe we are going to wait another
wonderful letter from you to show us the way.
What do you think about the sale of Pepsi in schools and hospitals ?
What do you think about Pakistan and Iran making atomic bombs ?
Majnun.
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
- Location: U.S.A.
Mitch, you calling us a cult is nothing new. And people who are quick to call the Baha'i Faith a cult themselves do not have a clear definition of what a cult is. When Jesus came, many prominent Jews thought that He was a false prophet and that His religion was a cult. But now you see how great Christianity has become, the biggest religion in the world. The same happened with Muhammad and His Faith. The Baha'i Faith might not be large in numbers, but it is the second most widespread religion in the world (that's official). You can practically go anywhere in the world and find a Baha'i community, even in many remote areas were you would not find churches, mosques, etc. And the Baha'i Faith will continue to grow. Why? Because Baha'u'llah brought the world teachings that are imperative to world unity. Our world now suffers from disunity, and the Divine Physician has brought the Cure. So the Baha’i Faith is about “unity,” whereas Christianity is all about “Do you have a personal relationship with Jesus?” That is, which religion places the greater emphasis on not only your own spiritual development, but also the unification of the world?
Anyway, soon, when corruption is at its hight, when it is obvious that Christianity's and Islam's teachings are not benefiting mankind, people will start turning to the Baha'i Faith in large numbers. The process has already begun. Around 2000 years ago, during Jesus' time, or even 1000 years ago, during Muhammad's time, do you really think that teachings such as "unity of the races" or "harmony of science and religion" were of paramount importance? No! and the people back then were not ready for such teachings. But look at what a different world it is today. These 1,000—2,000 year old religions were at once great, but today, again, we are living in very quite different times. I have talked to many people who recently became Baha’is, and a lot of of them (that I talked to) entered into the Baha'i Faith because of just one principle that was really important to them. For example, I talked to a scientist that said he joined the Faith because of the Baha'i belief of harmony between science and religion. What other religion preaches this? If you don't have religion, you have to turn to politics. Then your life becomes, "Animal rights," or "gay rights" or "anti-abortion" or "Pro-guns" or "no war" etc. The problem with that is disunity i.e. there is no unity of belief. You basically pick something you think is "important" and fight for it. But all of these issues are covered in the Baha'i Texts, and if we need elaboration we have our Institutions. All these are issues, obviously, that are important today, "modern" issues if you will, and so we need a "modern" world religion. The Baha'i Faith now is at its nascent stage, but if you read the Writings then you will know that nothing in this world can hinder the progress of the Baha'i Faith. It's progress, however, can be slowed down. However fast or slow it progresses it up to the Baha'i community, but it will nevertheless prosper. Want proof? Just look back to 1844 and then look to the present.
—Warrior
Anyway, soon, when corruption is at its hight, when it is obvious that Christianity's and Islam's teachings are not benefiting mankind, people will start turning to the Baha'i Faith in large numbers. The process has already begun. Around 2000 years ago, during Jesus' time, or even 1000 years ago, during Muhammad's time, do you really think that teachings such as "unity of the races" or "harmony of science and religion" were of paramount importance? No! and the people back then were not ready for such teachings. But look at what a different world it is today. These 1,000—2,000 year old religions were at once great, but today, again, we are living in very quite different times. I have talked to many people who recently became Baha’is, and a lot of of them (that I talked to) entered into the Baha'i Faith because of just one principle that was really important to them. For example, I talked to a scientist that said he joined the Faith because of the Baha'i belief of harmony between science and religion. What other religion preaches this? If you don't have religion, you have to turn to politics. Then your life becomes, "Animal rights," or "gay rights" or "anti-abortion" or "Pro-guns" or "no war" etc. The problem with that is disunity i.e. there is no unity of belief. You basically pick something you think is "important" and fight for it. But all of these issues are covered in the Baha'i Texts, and if we need elaboration we have our Institutions. All these are issues, obviously, that are important today, "modern" issues if you will, and so we need a "modern" world religion. The Baha'i Faith now is at its nascent stage, but if you read the Writings then you will know that nothing in this world can hinder the progress of the Baha'i Faith. It's progress, however, can be slowed down. However fast or slow it progresses it up to the Baha'i community, but it will nevertheless prosper. Want proof? Just look back to 1844 and then look to the present.
—Warrior
Linguistic Science Requires us to Admit Women to the UHJ
Dearest Baha'i Warrior:
You wrote:
Since you believe in the harmony of science and religion, if I can prove to you through linguistic science that Abdul-Baha erred in interpreting "O ye men of Justice" to exclude women, will you accept this science?
We all know that "O ye men" and "O men" are patterns of speech that occur elsewhere in the Writings of Baha'u'llah in which it is commonly understood to "include" women.
For example, when Baha'ullah says:
He means "O ye men and women", because both "men and women" must assist Baha'ullah in teaching His Cause.
And when He says, "O men", as in:
He means "O men and women" of understanding, in that we "all" [men and women] are to drink our fill of Divine wisdom and Divine utterance (the Word of God), not just men.
There needs to be more linguistic precision when interpreting the Word of God so that like patterns of speech, like "O men", or "O ye men", when used consistently to mean "men and women" in the Word of God are interpreted as such, unless from the specific context one is "forced" to exclude women.
When we ignore like patterns of speech and their common meaning, we are likely to error in our interpretation by assigning a unique or specific meaning that is more narrow or entirely different than what was intended.
Why can't we have the honesty to admit that Abdul-Baha is human and therefore erred in assigning a more narrow meaning then what is intended as deduced from the broader meaning of the "O ye men" or "O men" pattern of speech when it is used elsewhere in Baha'u'llah's Writings?
Why can't we accept this science and harmonize it with our religion, and finally acknowledge that "O ye men of justice", means "O ye men and women of justice", and stop discriminating against women in their election to the Universal House of Justice?
With loving Baha'i regards,
-Matt
You wrote:
For example, I talked to a scientist that said he joined the Faith because of the Baha'i belief of harmony between science and religion.
Since you believe in the harmony of science and religion, if I can prove to you through linguistic science that Abdul-Baha erred in interpreting "O ye men of Justice" to exclude women, will you accept this science?
We all know that "O ye men" and "O men" are patterns of speech that occur elsewhere in the Writings of Baha'u'llah in which it is commonly understood to "include" women.
For example, when Baha'ullah says:
"Say: To assist Me is to teach My Cause. This is a theme with which whole Tablets are laden. This is the changeless com-mandment of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future. Com-prehend this, O ye men of insight." -- Baha'u'llah, in Tablets of Baha'u'llah, revealed after the Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 196,
He means "O ye men and women", because both "men and women" must assist Baha'ullah in teaching His Cause.
And when He says, "O men", as in:
"The seas of Divine wisdom and Divine utterance have risen under the breath of the breeze of the All- Merciful. Hasten to drink your fill, O men of understanding!" - Baha'u'llah, Aqdas, Para. 2,
He means "O men and women" of understanding, in that we "all" [men and women] are to drink our fill of Divine wisdom and Divine utterance (the Word of God), not just men.
There needs to be more linguistic precision when interpreting the Word of God so that like patterns of speech, like "O men", or "O ye men", when used consistently to mean "men and women" in the Word of God are interpreted as such, unless from the specific context one is "forced" to exclude women.
When we ignore like patterns of speech and their common meaning, we are likely to error in our interpretation by assigning a unique or specific meaning that is more narrow or entirely different than what was intended.
Why can't we have the honesty to admit that Abdul-Baha is human and therefore erred in assigning a more narrow meaning then what is intended as deduced from the broader meaning of the "O ye men" or "O men" pattern of speech when it is used elsewhere in Baha'u'llah's Writings?
Why can't we accept this science and harmonize it with our religion, and finally acknowledge that "O ye men of justice", means "O ye men and women of justice", and stop discriminating against women in their election to the Universal House of Justice?
With loving Baha'i regards,
-Matt
Yes Matt
You are right Matt. "O you men", etc, is just a
way of speaking of the era. The majority of baha'is
understand this.
Majnun.
.
way of speaking of the era. The majority of baha'is
understand this.
Majnun.
.
Matt
I started reading posts under this topic yesterday and I just saw one specific problem you had with a ruling of Abdulbaha. Maybe there are more, but I read the whole thing quickly, so maybe I am missing some.
The rest of the discussion in my opinon was very general which is prone to mistakes always.
I want to talk about this one now and ask you to help me understand your way of looking at it better. You had in your post:
"Ascribe not to any soul that which thou wouldst not have ascribed to thee, and say not that which thou doest not. This is My command unto thee, do thou observe it." - Baha'u'llah, Hidden Words, 29
So when Abdul-Baha tells us its OK to discriminate against women on the UHJ, he is ascribing to women a condition he would not ascribe to men, and has therefore violated the command of God as Revealed by Baha'u'llah.
How more contradictory can you be concerning a fundamental issue of the Faith than a blatant violation of one of the central commands of God, the Golden Rule, which has been Revealed in every Dispensation of God, including this one?
I see a mistake in the way you are using the Golden rule. Golden rule although may read something like this: " don't want to others what you do'nt want for yourself", does not mean , eg:
- since I do'nt like to be kept in prison, I shouldn't want criminals to be kept in prison.
Golden rule should be used this way:
"put yourself in the place of the other/others, then see what you would like to be done to you, then want the same for them."
Now in our case, how could Abdulbaha use the golden rule?. He should have put himself in the place of a woman, and see if he wanted to have the right of being a memeber of UHJ. But you are missing this important step. You are saying that since he wanted this for men, and he was a man, so he violated golden rule. Based on this way of looking at Goden rule, no innocent person should want punishment for criminals, which is obviously wrong. The right version is this: if an innocnet persom didn't want to be punished were he quilty, then he shouldn't want thepunishment for the guilty person too.
In the same way, if Abdulbaba wanted to have the right of being a memeber of UHj for women, if he was a woman himself, then we could say he had violated the Golden rule. But how do we know this?
If you say this-that he would want to have this right were he a woman- it will only be your assumption. Also according to this assumtion of you, ALL the Bahai women want to have the right to be a member of UHJ, despite what their faith says, which is not the case as I have seen it so far.
Farid
I started reading posts under this topic yesterday and I just saw one specific problem you had with a ruling of Abdulbaha. Maybe there are more, but I read the whole thing quickly, so maybe I am missing some.
The rest of the discussion in my opinon was very general which is prone to mistakes always.
I want to talk about this one now and ask you to help me understand your way of looking at it better. You had in your post:
"Ascribe not to any soul that which thou wouldst not have ascribed to thee, and say not that which thou doest not. This is My command unto thee, do thou observe it." - Baha'u'llah, Hidden Words, 29
So when Abdul-Baha tells us its OK to discriminate against women on the UHJ, he is ascribing to women a condition he would not ascribe to men, and has therefore violated the command of God as Revealed by Baha'u'llah.
How more contradictory can you be concerning a fundamental issue of the Faith than a blatant violation of one of the central commands of God, the Golden Rule, which has been Revealed in every Dispensation of God, including this one?
I see a mistake in the way you are using the Golden rule. Golden rule although may read something like this: " don't want to others what you do'nt want for yourself", does not mean , eg:
- since I do'nt like to be kept in prison, I shouldn't want criminals to be kept in prison.
Golden rule should be used this way:
"put yourself in the place of the other/others, then see what you would like to be done to you, then want the same for them."
Now in our case, how could Abdulbaha use the golden rule?. He should have put himself in the place of a woman, and see if he wanted to have the right of being a memeber of UHJ. But you are missing this important step. You are saying that since he wanted this for men, and he was a man, so he violated golden rule. Based on this way of looking at Goden rule, no innocent person should want punishment for criminals, which is obviously wrong. The right version is this: if an innocnet persom didn't want to be punished were he quilty, then he shouldn't want thepunishment for the guilty person too.
In the same way, if Abdulbaba wanted to have the right of being a memeber of UHj for women, if he was a woman himself, then we could say he had violated the Golden rule. But how do we know this?
If you say this-that he would want to have this right were he a woman- it will only be your assumption. Also according to this assumtion of you, ALL the Bahai women want to have the right to be a member of UHJ, despite what their faith says, which is not the case as I have seen it so far.
Farid
Matt
I have a second issue with what you said. If I am not mistaken, you said that Abdulbaba had authority over administrative issues and not spiritual ones. Then you said that he erred in interpreting "men" literally as males and thus excluded women.
Now this is where I want your help: is this an administrative issue or spiritual issue? based on what you are saying, the ruling is about an administrative body and the interpretaion done is over the meaning of a word which doesn't have to do with spirituality. So if we agree that this was an administrative ruling, and also say that Abdulbaba had administrative authority, then should we obey him and accept it from him or not? If you say no, then how do you answer the apparent contradiction?
Farid
I have a second issue with what you said. If I am not mistaken, you said that Abdulbaba had authority over administrative issues and not spiritual ones. Then you said that he erred in interpreting "men" literally as males and thus excluded women.
Now this is where I want your help: is this an administrative issue or spiritual issue? based on what you are saying, the ruling is about an administrative body and the interpretaion done is over the meaning of a word which doesn't have to do with spirituality. So if we agree that this was an administrative ruling, and also say that Abdulbaba had administrative authority, then should we obey him and accept it from him or not? If you say no, then how do you answer the apparent contradiction?
Farid