Infallibility

[danieldemol]

You already know my position on infallibility of the Manifestations of God. It is as what Tony quoted, essential infallibility.
I do not believe that any ordinary human can receive a revelation from God because that is what Baha'u'llah wrote.
So, you do not believe that Baha'ullah got a Revelation from God?

I believe that Baha’u’llah got a revelation from God - the degree of which was in accordance with His capacity.

In other words He perceived God’s light through the coloured glass of His own individuality.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

In other words He perceived God’s light through the coloured glass of His own individuality.

Have you read the Súriy-i-Haykal? As the Manifestation, they are the 'Self of God'. They are all we can know of God, all our thoughts about God are of the Manifestation, we have no access beyond them.

The Summons of the Lord of Hosts | Bahá’í Reference Library

"....Pointing with her finger unto My head, she addressed all who are in heaven and all who are on earth, saying: By God! This is the Best-Beloved of the worlds, and yet ye comprehend not. This is the Beauty of God amongst you, and the power of His sovereignty within you, could ye but understand. This is the Mystery of God and His Treasure, the Cause of God and His glory unto all who are in the kingdoms of Revelation and of creation, if ye be of them that perceive. This is He Whose Presence is the ardent desire of the denizens of the Realm of eternity, and of them that dwell within the Tabernacle of glory, and yet from His Beauty do ye turn aside....."

Hope you and family are well and happy.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

I believe that Baha’u’llah got a revelation from God - the degree of which was in accordance with His capacity.

In other words He perceived God’s light through the coloured glass of His own individuality.

Everything one does is according to their individuality...
How colored that glass was is another matter altogether.

 

[Trailblazer]

Have you read the Súriy-i-Haykal? As the Manifestation, they are the 'Self of God'. They are all we can know of God, all our thoughts about God? are of the Manifestation, we have no access beyond them.

That is what Baha'u'llah wrote, but people who believe they have some other access believe they have some other access..... because they WANT to have access. It is all psychological, and nothing anyone says that is going to change their minds, unless they decide to change it themselves.

It's all good.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Everything one does is according to their individuality...
How colored that glass was is another matter altogether.

Yes and I see the Messenger is the pure white light, it is us that sees the refraction of color from the prism of life.

Regards Tony

 

[siti]

The term ‘Baha’i is the only authoritative and official word used to represent a member of the Baha’i Faith.

There is no such thing as Baha’i liberals’. There is no such Baha’i. We are all just Baha’is. We are one united world community.

A letter from the Universal House of Justice clarifies such terms do not represent the Baha’i Faith or a member of it.

In this regard, the House of Justice has noted your understandable repugnance at an apparent temptation to use misleading and invidious labels like "traditionalists" and "liberals", which divide the Bahá'í community. To the extent that this divisive habit of mind may persist in the Bahá'í community, it is obviously a carry-over from non-Bahá'í society and a manifestation of an immature conception of life. If Bahá'ís were to persist in this mode of thinking, it would bring to naught even the most worthwhile intellectual endeavour, as has so conspicuously been the case with societies of the past.
Dec 10, 1992 to an individual)

The term "Baha'i" and especially the term "liberal" are just words - the UHJ does not get to define how non-members use them - even if it does look down its nose and dictate how you - as a "faithful Baha'i" may use them. That last paragraph, in its arrogant and condescending tone, just goes to show to any unbiased mind how utterly unprepared the UHJ is to promote any semblance of genuine "unity" among the diversity of humankind - just look at the words they use...and frankly, the Baha'i members rounding on @danieldemol the way the have in the last couple of pages of this thread simply underlines it. How can a group of people so utterly incapable of accepting a slightly different version of their own faith possibly hope to lead the world to religious unity? That they even imagine it could, it seems to me, is what should be labelled "an immature conception" - and on the basis of this discussion about turning copper to gold, I can't even imagine what possible contribution this faith might make to any "intellectual endeavour".

Now to put that into the context of this repeatedly revived thread - I think to imagine that any human is "infallible" is an "immature conception" and the very antithesis of "intellectual endeavour" - and frankly, the quality of argumentation of supporters of "infallibility" repeatedly proves both points.

 

[paarsurrey]

The term "Baha'i" and especially the term "liberal" are just words - the UHJ does not get to define how non-members use them - even if it does look down its nose and dictate how you - as a "faithful Baha'i" may use them. That last paragraph, in its arrogant and condescending tone, just goes to show to any unbiased mind how utterly unprepared the UHJ is to promote any semblance of genuine "unity" among the diversity of humankind - just look at the words they use...and frankly, the Baha'i members rounding on @danieldemol the way the have in the last couple of pages of this thread simply underlines it. How can a group of people so utterly incapable of accepting a slightly different version of their own faith possibly hope to lead the world to religious unity? That they even imagine it could, it seems to me, is what should be labelled "an immature conception" - and on the basis of this discussion about turning copper to gold, I can't even imagine what possible contribution this faith might make to any "intellectual endeavour".

Now to put that into the context of this repeatedly revived thread - I think to imagine that any human is "infallible" is an "immature conception" and the very antithesis of "intellectual endeavour" - and frankly, the quality of argumentation of supporters of "infallibility" repeatedly proves both points.

"to imagine that any human is "infallible" is an "immature conception" "

Indeed it is an immature conception. The relevant question:

Did Bahaullah claim infallibility specifically about himself in his core book "Kitab-i-Iqan" in clear and unequivocal manner? And gave a reasonable argument to it.
Anybody, please

Regards

 

[Trailblazer]

How can a group of people so utterly incapable of accepting a slightly different version of their own faith possibly hope to lead the world to religious unity?

There is no different version, there is only ONE version, the version revealed by Baha'u'llah, who says that Manifestations of God are infallible, period, end of story.

Anyone who insists that Manifestations of God are not infallible is not really a Baha'i because they disagree with Baha'u'llah, the Prophet Founder of the Baha'i Faith.
It is really that simple., no need to make it complicated.

No, no ordinary human is infallible, but Manifestations of God are not ordinary humans.

“And since there can be no tie of direct intercourse to bind the one true God with His creation, and no resemblance whatever can exist between the transient and the Eternal, the contingent and the Absolute, He hath ordained that in every age and dispensation a pure and stainless Soul be made manifest in the kingdoms of earth and heaven. Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. He hath, moreover, conferred upon Him a double station. The first station, which is related to His innermost reality, representeth Him as One Whose voice is the voice of God Himself................ The second station is the human station, exemplified by the following verses: “I am but a man like you.” “Say, praise be to my Lord! Am I more than a man, an apostle?” These Essences of Detachment, these resplendent Realities are the channels of God’s all-pervasive grace. Led by the light of unfailing guidance, and invested with supreme sovereignty, They are commissioned to use the inspiration of Their words, the effusions of Their infallible grace and the sanctifying breeze of Their Revelation for the cleansing of every longing heart and receptive spirit from the dross and dust of earthly cares and limitations. Then, and only then, will the Trust of God, latent in the reality of man, emerge, as resplendent as the rising Orb of Divine Revelation, from behind the veil of concealment, and implant the ensign of its revealed glory upon the summits of men’s hearts.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 66-67

 

[TransmutingSoul]

How can a group of people so utterly incapable of accepting a slightly different version of their own faith possibly hope to lead the world to religious unity?

There is only one Baha'i Faith. One can say they are a Baha'i and understand it from a more liberal sense.

But I think that causes more issues than it is worth, as I have never understood labeling an understanding. It like calling humanity black white and brown, when it is best to just recognise we are one human race, with a diversity of colour and views.

The key is to find a balance and Baha'u'llah has said the balance can not be found while the councils of the Most High go unheeded.

I see the only way we can accept that, is to accept Baha'u'llah as infallible and leave no room for doubt to fester division. Baha'u'llah has warned us that the divided thoughts on these important issues of Faith, can and will do great harm to any cause.

Baha'u'llah was very, very, very clear as to infallibility. It is the bedrock foundation of Baha'i.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Anyone who insists that Manifestations of God are not infallible is not really a Baha'i

I see that is also very far from what Baha'u'llah offered. @danieldemol

We all have different understandings about who Baha'u'llah was. To be a Baha'i is to recognise He is the Manifestation of God for this age and then attempt to implement the advice and laws. In one or many ways, none of us live up to the requirements and it is no place for us to say who and who is not a Baha'i. As to who makes those decisions, that has been made clear in the Baha'i writings and is via the Baha'i Administrative process.

As I posted above, always happy to discuss and in that way we all grow.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

I see that is also very far from what Baha'u'llah offered. @danieldemol

We all have different understandings about who Baha'u'llah was. To be a Baha'i is to recognise He is the Manifestation of God for this age and then attempt to implement the advice and laws. In one or many ways, none of us live up to the requirements and it is no place for us to say who and who is not a Baha'i. As to who makes those decisions, that has been made clear in the Baha'i writings and is via the Baha'i Administrative process.

As I posted above, always happy to discuss and in that way we all grow.

Regards Tony

I understand your point of view, but if they do not believe that Baha'u'llah was infallible, then they are disagreeing with what Baha'u'llah clearly wrote.

They are saying one of two things:
1) Baha'u'llah was a liar, or
2) Baha'u'llah was deluded.

 

[Trailblazer]

I see the only way we can accept that, is to accept Baha'u'llah as infallible and leave no room for doubt to fester division. Baha'u'llah has warned us that the divided thoughts on these important issues of Faith, can and will do great harm to any cause.

Yes, it will cause division, we can already see that happening on this thread..
The question is why some Baha'is need to coddle Baha'is who disagree with what Baha'u'llah wrote.
I think it is dishonest and not good for the Cause of God.

It would be different if they were new Baha'is and they were not deepened, but when the Writings of Baha'u'llah are presented to them and they still disagree with them, that is another matter.

Baha'u'llah was very, very, very clear as to infallibility. It is the bedrock foundation of Baha'i.

So, how can you say that someone is a Baha'i if they do not believe that?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I understand your point of view, but if they do not believe that Baha'u'llah was infallible, then they are disagreeing with what Baha'u'llah clearly wrote.

They are saying one of two things:
1) Baha'u'llah was a liar, or
2) Baha'u'llah was deluded.

I am also a black and white type of guy, but I am mellowing.

It could be one is yet to grasp what is Infallibility and the reason for it. Can we say we have really grasped what it means?

It may be we would be better to be silent on this, because remember there is also much advice for us to never burden a soul.

Regards Tony.

 

[Trailblazer]

"to imagine that any human is "infallible" is an "immature conception" "

Indeed it is an immature conception.

It seems immature to you because you are a Muslim with a different belief.

The relevant question:

Did Baha'u'llah claim infallibility specifically about himself in his core book "Kitab-i-Iqan" in clear and unequivocal manner? And gave a reasonable argument to it.

I agree that is the relevant question, but there is no reason to think that Baha'u'llah would have addressed infallibility in the Kitab-i-Iqan, since that was not the purpose of that Tablet. Infallibility is clearly addressed in other Tablets which are contained in Gleanings.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yes, it will cause division, we can already see that happening on this thread..
The question is why some Baha'is need to coddle Baha'is who disagree with what Baha'u'llah wrote.
I think it is dishonest and not good for the Cause of God.

It would be different if they were new Baha'is and they were not deepened, but when the Writings of Baha'u'llah are presented to them and they still disagree with them, that is another matter.

I never make those judgements. I have a hard time trying to be a Baha'i Myself.

Im way to fallible.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

It seems immature to you because you are a Muslim with a different belief.

I agree that is the relevant question, but there is no reason to think that Baha'u'llah would have addressed infallibility in the Kitab-i-Iqan, since that was not the purpose of that Tablet. Infallibility is clearly addressed in other Tablets which are contained in Gleanings.

The Infallibility of the Messengers is an important theme in the Kitab-i-iqan.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

I am also a black and white type of guy, but I am mellowing.

It could be one is yet to grasp what is Infallibility and the reason for it. Can we say we have really grasped what it means?

It may be we would be better to be silent on this, because remember there is also much advice for us to never burden a soul.

Regards Tony.

Did you not post a quote from Abdu'l-Baha explaining what it means?

I am not saying we have the right to judge or criticize anyone, but pointing out the Truth of what Baha'u'llah wrote is not criticizing or judging. Is it burdening a soul to tell them what Baha'u'llah wrote?

We should not harp on it, and we should be silent after we have accurately represented what Baha'u'llah wrote.
It is up to the institutions of the Faith to deal with it, if there is any dealing to be done.

 

[Trailblazer]

I never make those judgements. I have a hard time trying to be a Baha'i Myself.

Im way to fallible.

Regards Tony

As I just said, it is not about judging people, it is about presenting what Baha'u'llah wrote.
I do not believe in coddling.

 

[siti]

There is only one Baha'i Faith. One can say they are a Baha'i and understand it from a more liberal sense.

But I think that causes more issues than it is worth, as I have never understood labeling an understanding. It like calling humanity black white and brown, when it is best to just recognise we are one human race, with a diversity of colour and views.

But people ARE black, white and brown - well actually they mostly various shades of brown really aren't they...but the point is, I don't see the point of denying a fact so obvious that it is as plain as the nose on one's face. There's a government sponsored TV advertisement where I live that suggests that even mentioning a person's ethnicity should be avoided because it leads to racial stereotyping...but how can we respect the ethnicity of a person if we never even mention it? It is silly - and "immature" - not to be able to discuss our differences with maturity and acceptance - it is, frankly, "immature" to insist that there is "only one" truth. And in the last few pages of this thread, I am sorry to say, Baha'is are looking more and more fundamentalist than even I gave them credit for before. I think you need to rethink what Baha'u'llah might have intended by claiming infallibility - because he obviously got a few things wrong - but did he really mean that he could not get anything wrong...or did he mean that following his spiritual guidance could not fail to bring the blessings promised? Nobody is going to die because Baha'u'llah was wrong about copper turning into gold...but if he was wrong about an afterlife, or about the "new social order" that will bring an end to racially- and religiously-motivated enmity, warfare and prejudice, that's a different kettle of fish altogether. So what did Baha'u'llah really mean when he claimed infallibility? That anyone who doubted even a single word ascribed to him was not to be considered a "faithful Baha'i" - or that everyone generally following his wise counsel would - without any shadow of doubt - receive the promised blessings? Is the Baha'i faith fundamentalist and intolerant or progressive and unprejudiced?

 

[Trailblazer]

The Infallibility of the Messengers is an important theme in the Kitab-i-iqan.

Regards Tony

I could not find what paarsurrey wanted in the Iqan by doing a search for infallible or infallibility.
What paarsurrey wants is Baha'u'llah declaring that He is infallible... Nothing less than that will do.