-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
No one speaks for all Baha’is
- Thread starter Jim
- Start date
The Universal House of Justice makes authoritative statements about what Baha’is believe. The rest are just personal opinions.
Jim
Nets of Wonder
False.
ETA: Sorry, that was unfriendly. I disagree with you about that. In a search, I found very few statements from the Universal House of Justice about what Baha'is believe, and none more recent than 1968. I don't think that even those statements were true for all Baha'is, or even intended that way. In any case, in my understanding of Baha'i scriptures, statements from the Universal House of Justice about what Baha'is believe, have no authority.
Last edited:
The Baha’is are fallible human beings just like everyone else on this planet. As the Christians have their Bible and the Muslims the Quran the Baha’is have the writings of Bahá’u’lláh. We’re fortunate to have the authoritative interpretations of Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi. Beyond that we have the Universal House of Justice to resolve difficult problems.
On religious forum there is heightened sensitivity about Baha’is quoting from the writings excessively. Some have accused the Baha’is of proselytising which of course we shouldn’t be. For those reasons, I tend to avoid routinely using quotations from the Baha’i writings.
On religious forum there is heightened sensitivity about Baha’is quoting from the writings excessively. Some have accused the Baha’is of proselytising which of course we shouldn’t be. For those reasons, I tend to avoid routinely using quotations from the Baha’i writings.
Are there any Baha'is that do not believe that everything Baha'u'llah said was absolutely correct without any errors whatsoever, such as in making statements about science which the scientific community recognize as patently false claims? For instance, do all Baha'is believe that the human species did not evolve from earlier animal life forms?
Jim
Nets of Wonder
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Bahai's are interesting in respect that they are probably one of the few religions where they had a living prophet in relatively modern times.
It's sort of offers a living window as to how Jesus possibly became reknown and what it entails had he existed.
It's sort of offers a living window as to how Jesus possibly became reknown and what it entails had he existed.
That's encouraging to hear. So if a Baha'i were to say Bahaullah was a teacher of Wisdom, but had some wrong ideas mixed in there too, they are not viewed a heretics by the Baha'i community and authorities and asked to leave, but are instead accepted as faithful in their own right? What line of belief is there that a believer cannot cross and still be considered a Baha'i?
Jim
Nets of Wonder
I didn't say that!What would happen would depend on where, when and how they say it. The reactions from other Baha'is, including Baha'i administrators, could be anything from kind and sympathetic efforts to "correct their misunderstandings," to maligning and scolding them and insinuating that they're Covenant breakers.
I don't think there is any line.
Yes and no.
Many Hindu and Buddhist lineages (that often go back a thousand years or more) have living preceptors. They're not called prophets, but they're most certainly living, and looked up to by adherents. Nor are they self-declared, but appointed by their predecessor. Unlike some Abrahamic lineages, they're chosen by merit, not by bloodlines. Living preceptors change and adjust with the times, whereas dead guys could only speak to people of their time, not people of today.
I don't know much about Hindu or Buddhist preceptors, but in Tantra the "long since dead greatest spiritual Preceptors" still speak to people of today.
I guess I also call myself incredibly lucky that I knew my spiritual Preceptor or Sadguru 'in the flesh' as it were or should I rather think that I had created a very special samkara earlier to meet Him in person during this lifetime?
Last edited:
I'm going to disagree with you Jim as a former Baha'i from the early 1980's. The Bahai's have authoritative texts and decisions of the Universal House of Justice are also considered authoritative. Dissenters can be deemed 'Covenant Breakers'.
I see in recent years a more modern western face placed on the Baha'i Faith to make it more palatable to modern liberal religious culture but the Baha'i orthodoxy is still there below this surface. And the orthodox Bahai's would call this a good thing that the Faith is divinely guided.
Would you go so far as to call this a fundamentalist aspect of the Bahai faith?
Jim
Nets of Wonder
I'm talking about beliefs, not administrative decisions. I've never seen or heard of anything in Baha'i scriptures saying that statements about beliefs from the Universal House of Justice have any authority. In fact, Baha'i scriptures say explicitly that the only interpretations that have any authority are those of Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian.
Jim
Nets of Wonder
I see that there's a page on the website of the International Baha'i Community titled "What Baha'is Believe." I don't think that means that all Baha'is believe all that. It might mean that those views are widely promoted by Baha'is, and most Baha'is would say that they agree with them.
Perhaps in that you must accept the fact that the Faith was and is divinely inspired and guided. You can not disagree with clearly stated beliefs and teachings.
Any beliefs expressly written in the Baha'i scriptures may not be disagreed with by any Baha'i in good standing. And the scriptures are quite exhaustive. The Guardian gives authoritative clarification on these beliefs also.
(from Wikipedia article) (highlights mine) Shoghi Effendi has written:
... the Universal House of Justice has been invested with the function of legislating on matters not expressly revealed in the teachings.... whose exclusive right and prerogative is to pronounce upon and deliver the final judgement on such laws and ordinances as Bahá'u'lláh has not expressly revealed....
So acceptance of all belief matters expressly revealed (with clarifications from the Guardian) are mandatory for all Baha'is. This is quite different than the freedom and range of thought concept that you were arguing for in the OP statement. Statements like 'Bahai's believe' are quite valid.
Last edited:
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
It's like saying, we Catholics believe the sacraments of christ but each of us define confession based on what we what we say rather than the confession to god itself.
We as Catholics believe the Pope but a lot of us have ill feelings about subjects other pope's wouldnt challenge.
These are examples. I'm sure bahaism is similar with the house of justice.
