Investigating Bahaullah's Book of Iqan

[TransmutingSoul]

Because it is a far more plausible account of how Baha'u'llah came by some (at least) of his religious knowledge. Why would she lie about that in a letter to her nephew?

Plausable, because you do not agree that Baha'u'llah had been given knowledge by God.

There are many eye witness accounts of this knowlege Baha'u'llah posessed. Many tried to test Baha'u'llah by having prepared questions before they met him.

I need not tell of these stories, but to say they confirm that the knowledge of Baha'u'llah came from a source He quoted and not from worldly learning.

Regards Tony

 

[siti]

There are many eye witness accounts

So you guys keep saying, I don't suppose you would care to list a few...

I need not tell of these stories

I guess not!

And this is the problem - what you really have are a handful of faithful acolytes of Baha'u'llah who attest to his apparent divine inspiration on account of his ability to write an endless torrent of flowery verbiage based on things he claimed he had never learned. Its fine if you want to follow their lead and accept Baha'u'llah's divinity with mindless credulity - but please stop asking the rest of us to accept it as an equally compelling case compared to the far more likely scenario that he was just another in a seemingly endless procession of false claimants to the title of "Messiah".

This is not a 50/50 flip of the coin thing - people are not all equally likely to be a messiah as not are they? You can't just say well you don't believe it but we do. If you post a thread like this one and make claims for special supernatural revelation you have to back it up with evidence - extraordinary evidence because these are extraordinary claims. The fact that his brother professed to believe in him (for example) simply doesn't count. I am fairly sure I could get my brother to agree that I was the Messiah for the right price. You have to have independent corroborating evidence and you have none. Nothing at all as far as I can tell. And yet you guys keep on posting these threads that say "look - here's proof!" - but there is nothing there. Nothing at all. I don't know why it bothers me so much. Maybe its just disturbing that with all the advantages of the information age, and a professed commitment to both "universal education" and "independent investigation of truth", so many (millions apparently) of people are prepared to take such an important matter on the word of a mere handful (at best) of obviously biased and partial human beings and against all reason and evidence to the contrary.

IT has claimed that the Iqan contains "all scripture" - which in his own words means whatever teachings are in the Quran, the Bible, and the Buddhist, Hindu and Zoroastrian scriptures - in condensed form. But unless you flatly deny the veracity of some of the most defining and clearly scriptural doctrines of Christianity, etc...there is no way that can be true. I have several times asked him to provide evidence in favour of his claim; to refute my contention that the doctrine of atonement as is clearly found in scripture is missing from the Iqan and most recently that there is any independent evidence corroborating the Baha'i claim that Baha'u'llah did not learn about religion from books, or people. So far he has failed to present one jot of any such evidence. And now you chip in with yet another baseless claim for which you decline (or are unable) to furnish any evidence.

Where is the evidence, Tony? Where is the evidence IT?

 

[sayak83]

How come it requires training? All it needs is the ability to read, and have a fair judgement! It seems to me, you are making it more complicated than what it is really!

No. You need to know Iranian languages. You need to have access to earliest possible manuscripts and knowledge of literary styles to adjudge authenticity. You need to understand the socio-political-religious context of the environment in which the writer wrote, and sources he/she had access to. You need to understand social psychology in order to interpret the varying responses of the first readers........
Anybody can write pseudo-histories. Writing actual good history is the hardest skill to master imo.
From Reliable Sources, An Introduction to Historical Methods

 

[siti]

PS

I have found irrefutable evidence...here is Baha'u'llah's big sister confronting a crowd of fanatical early Baha'is in old Baghdad

 

[Dawnofhope]

The substitutionary atonement is a largely a Pauline based doctrine that refers to Jesus Christ dying as a substitute for the sins of each one of us. According to St Paul

For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures
1 Corinthians 15:3

All men are sinners (Romans 3:9-18, Romans 3:23)
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God

The penalty for our sinfulness is death (Romans 6:23).
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Views from a conservative Christian perspective dictate that without Christ, we are going to die and spend an eternity in hell as payment for our sins. From a Baha'i perpsective hell is seperation from God.

For Christians we will all die, but some will live in heaven with the Lord Jesus for eternity, while others will live a life in hell for eternity. So death spoken of in Romans 6:23 refers to a life in hell. However, eternal life is available through Jesus Christ and this is substitutionary atonement.

Jesus died for us and our sins when He was crucified on the cross. We deserved the agony of death Christ endured but because of His Mercy He placed Himself on the cross to die. Christ took upon Himself the punishment which befits us wretched sinners. He substituted Himself for us and took what we rightly deserved.

This was a useful narrative based on Hebrew scripture taught to the Greeks that enabled a better appreciation of the necessity for Christ or the Manifestation of God for that era in history.

The Baha'i belief does differ from Christianity. We believe that all the Manifestations of God sacrifice themselves for the redemption of mankind. All the Manifestations of God sacrifice themselves for the redemption of humanity. They all endure persecution and in that sense are a ransom for us all.

Some of Baha'u'llah's words in the Kitab-i-Iqan that addresses the issue:

Thus it is that through the rise of these Luminaries of God the world is made new, the waters of everlasting life stream forth, the billows of loving-kindness surge, the clouds of grace are gathered, and the breeze of bounty bloweth upon all created things. It is the warmth that these Luminaries of God generate, and the undying fires they kindle, which cause the light of the love of God to burn fiercely in the heart of humanity.
(Kitab-i-Iqan p34)

And yet, is not the object of every Revelation to effect a transformation in the whole character of mankind, a transformation that shall manifest itself both outwardly and inwardly, that shall affect both its inner life and external conditions? For if the character of mankind be not changed, the futility of God's universal Manifestations would be apparent.
(The Kitab-i-Iqan, p. 240)

His purpose was to warn the people lest, God forbid, they cling to such foolish thoughts and deprive themselves of the divine Beauty.
(The Kitab-i-Iqan, p. 230)

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Because it is a far more plausible account of how Baha'u'llah came by some (at least) of his religious knowledge.

Why it is more plausible? How do we know it is more plausible?

Why would she lie about that in a letter to her nephew?

I didn't say she nessesarily lied. Even if she did not, I already showed you, why in my view, what she says does not disprove the claim of Bahaullah that His knowledge is not through human learning.

I pointed out that, since she had joined with Yahya Azal, who was enemy of Bahaullah, she can very possibly be biased, and thus exegerated or presented the facts inaccurately to refute Bahaullah. Thus, we cannot just take her words for it. We need to analyze it, and consider it in the light of other evidences.

Baha'u'llah had 16 siblings - should we ask all of them? OK - we know that at least two died before Baha'u'llah became prominent, at least 5 expressly did not believe in him, and 3 certainly did - at least for a time - possibly 4 but I'm not exactly sure about the Russian ambassador's official's wife (one of his sisters) - maybe she was, or maybe she just took pity on her brother and gave him a home for a while. The rest we don't know. So his siblings were definitely split on the issue, and as far as we can possibly tell, slightly in favour of disbelief.So why would you take the word of the smaller number of his siblings rather than the larger number who disbelieved?

No other sibling of Bahaullah said that Bahaullah had studied, or learned His knowledge from others. They did not become believers, perhaps because they did not give it a thought that, the innate knowledge of Bahaullah is a proof of His divinity.
But, since Kalim, was truly a believer in Bahaullah and had accepted to suffer in prison because of His belief in Bahaullah, we can conclude that in His view, Bahaullah was not lying. Otherwise why would Kalim be willing to go through imprisonment for a lying imposter brother? So, is even with Abdulbaha. Why would He be willing to go through so many years of imprisnment if He did not truly believe in Bahaullah?

No let's not - we've already done that - it is clear that she meant to indicate that Baha'u'llah had gained a clear understanding of "Mahdi"-related prophecies long before he decided to take on the mantle of a "Manifestation" for himself.

Yes, she meant to indicate that Bahaullah had learned these things from others. But you seem to just take her words for it. The problem that i see is, Bahaullah had clearly a different view on Mahdi, than the scholars of His time. So, i am not sure why you think He learned from them.

Yes - a book that contains oblique, incomplete and skewed views of other religions.

This is yet what you need to prove.

Yes - a book that has a slanted and somewhat shallow understanding of religions that were not studied in depth.

Not sure what you mean here. Is Iqan in your view has a shallow understanding of religions?!
Many of the Muslim scholars or even Christians have believed in Bahaullah by reading this Book!

We have already shown by this thread that this is not the case. I gave an example that is not there - apart from the very poor example you gave in the OP you have yet to present any positive evidence that the Iqan actually contains any genuine consistency with any substantive scriptural doctrine from any tradition other than the Qur'an - and even that is questionable.

But you stopped and did not reply to my last reply to yours.

But really, the Iqan is more accurately described as a commentary on the Qur'an. It certainly does not contain "all scriptures" in condensed form - as you have utterly failed to demonstrate.

If you think it does not contain all scriptures in condensed form, you need to prove this by trying and trying until you find one. I think you expect the scriptures of other religions to be literally copied in Iqan to be considered containing having all scriptures, whereas, many of the things in the past scriptures are symbolic, and should not be taken literally, thus, their correct explanations are in Iqan, not literally same stories. Now, even name of Krishna or Buddha are not in Iqan either, but the essence of their teachings is, in a condensed form. If you say, not, you need to show which one!

 

[InvestigateTruth]

No. You need to know Iranian languages.

I agree that the original historical accounts of life of Bahaullah for the most part are in Iranian Language. With some exceptions of the books that E.G. Brown had written on the history of early Babi and Bahais. However, those original historical accounts of life of Bahaullah also for the most part are already translated into English. Now, specially if we are limiting our investigation to evidences of Bahaullah's education and human learnings, the matter from my experience does not require an extensive investigation in all subjects.
Specially, even those who tried to refute Bahaullah's claim, have provided translations of anything that possibly they thought they could use to refute Bahaullah.

You need to have access to earliest possible manuscripts and knowledge of literary styles to adjudge authenticity. You need to understand the socio-political-religious context of the environment in which the writer wrote, and sources he/she had access to. You need to understand social psychology in order to interpret the varying responses of the first readers........
Anybody can write pseudo-histories. Writing actual good history is the hardest skill to master imo.
From Reliable Sources, An Introduction to Historical Methods

Sure, but how much all these are required also depends on the time of events. For example if we want to know about the life of a Person who lived 2000 years ago, constructing history and writing it up, would be much more difficult than, if we are investigating into life of a person who lived 150 years ago, and specially when we are only now in this thread interested in how much Bahaullah had education or learning.

 

[siti]

@InvestigateTruth - as usual, no substance, just repetition of baseless claims.

If you say, not, you need to show which one!

OK - where is samsara, where is ahimsa, or moksha, where is the Christian doctrine of atonement, or the resurrection of the dead, where is reincarnation...should I continue? We're just wasting our time - they are not there and they are absolutely key concepts in some of the scriptural traditions you claim are encapsulated in the Iqan. You made the claim - its for you to prove - I have given you a list to start from...maybe pick up where you left off with atonement - where is that? Maybe you could follow your advice to me earlier and make a table: here I'll start it for you - all you need to do is put the links to the online version of Iqan to the paragraph(s) that contain these teachings:

Teaching Reference
ahimsa
atonement
moksha
reincarnation
resurrection of the dead
samsara

That will do for now...if you can prove at least these are all there in Iqan, perhaps we can then delve a little more into it.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Teaching Reference
ahimsa
atonement
moksha
reincarnation
resurrection of the dead
samsara

That will do for now...if you can prove at least these are all there in Iqan, perhaps we can then delve a little more into it.

More to the point, if it can be shown they are there, but not the way they are currently considered, then It becomes a choice of seeing it with new eyes and hearing with new ears.

If one has no wish to even consider that there may be alternate meaning to these past held doctrines, then its by far far the best option not to even discuss them.

Regards Tony

 

[siti]

More to the point, if it can be shown they are there, but not the way they are currently considered, then It becomes a choice of seeing it with new eyes and hearing with new ears.

If one has no wish to even consider that there may be alternate meaning to these past held doctrines, then its by far far the best option not to even discuss them.

Well yes! But I didn't start a thread by asking for examples of doctrines that are not there, did I? So since such a thread has been started, I am now asking, very specifically, for references to the doctrines I believe are probably not found in Iqan. Your contribution so far, Tony, has been to decline to offer any examples to support anything that you and your fellow Baha'i have claimed in this thread.

So let me get this straight - the purpose of this thread was not really to begin an "interfaith discussion" about how the Iqan contains "all scriptures in condensed form" and about how one might reconcile the very deep differences between how some key scriptural doctrines are understood in other faiths as compared to these "condensed forms", but rather to attract the attention of unwary folks who might summarily accept the bold claims of the Baha'i faith and declare faith in Baha'u'llah without giving the matter a second thought? Essentially that's what you seem to be saying isn't it? If I don't agree with the Baha'i interpretation "its by far far the best option not to even discuss" it.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Well yes! But I didn't start a thread by asking for examples of doctrines that are not there, did I? So since such a thread has been started, I am now asking, very specifically, for references to the doctrines I believe are probably not found in Iqan. Your contribution so far, Tony, has been to decline to offer any examples to support anything that you and your fellow Baha'i have claimed in this thread.

So let me get this straight - the purpose of this thread was not really to begin an "interfaith discussion" about how the Iqan contains "all scriptures in condensed form" and about how one might reconcile the very deep differences between how some key scriptural doctrines are understood in other faiths as compared to these "condensed forms", but rather to attract the attention of unwary folks who might summarily accept the bold claims of the Baha'i faith and declare faith in Baha'u'llah without giving the matter a second thought? Essentially that's what you seem to be saying isn't it? If I don't agree with the Baha'i interpretation "its by far far the best option not to even discuss" it.

Siti, embrace it all as to how you wish to see it. I think @InvestigateTruth has explained his posted topic well enough. I am but a poster on this thread with my views.

Personally I have a lot more confidence in people that they can make their own choices and not be influenced by you, or I, or anyone else that may choose to post.

Personally I see that the written Word from all Gods Messengers, speaks for itself and what man has added stands out like a sore thumb. That is me though and like everyone else, I can make wrong choices.

Regards Tony

 

[siti]

Siti, embrace it all as to how you wish to see it.

So no evidence then? Just as I thought.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So no evidence then? Just as I thought.

That is not the case, but sorry I am busy at this time and to address the topics you posted, will take some time and a bit more study.

I will attempt a couple over the next few days if @InvestigateTruth does not get around to it before me.

Regards Tony

 

[siti]

We believe that all the Manifestations of God sacrifice themselves for the redemption of mankind. All the Manifestations of God sacrifice themselves for the redemption of humanity. They all endure persecution and in that sense are a ransom for us all.

Right OK! And the self-sacrificing spirit of the Manifestations and is certainly an important message in the opening part of the Iqan. I can see that - but it is very different from this...

from a conservative Christian perspective dictate that without Christ, we are going to die and spend an eternity in hell as payment for our sins. From a Baha'i perpsective hell is seperation from God.

For Christians we will all die, but some will live in heaven with the Lord Jesus for eternity, while others will live a life in hell for eternity. So death spoken of in Romans 6:23 refers to a life in hell. However, eternal life is available through Jesus Christ and this is substitutionary atonement.

...this - propitiatory, substitutionary, one sacrifice for the sins of all men forever is very clearly detailed in scripture - and not just Paul's letters as my earlier references show - and very clearly absent from the Iqan.

So one can argue that the Bible was wrong and the correct view is the Baha'i one - or possibly even that the Bible teaching is meant to be understood allegorically - Jesus' sacrifice - in this case - standing as a metaphor for all the suffering of all the Manifestations through the ages. But as far as I am aware, there are no such arguments in the Iqan (correct me if I am wrong). So that clearly important and clearly scriptural teaching is just not there. And how can one then claim that the Iqan contains "all scripture". It just doesn't. Does it?

OK - so that then presumably means that Baha'u'llah did not intend his claim to be understood in such a literalistic fashion. Perhaps when he said it contains "all scripture" - he did not mean what your friend IT suggested in the OP at all.

Perhaps what he meant was, the key to understanding "all scripture" was contained in the Iqan.

And that's quite a different proposition. And a very different - and possibly even meaningful interfaith discussion.

As it stands, we have an OP with a baseless claim and then a succession of refusals to provide any evidence to support that claim...it kind of reminds me of those horse jumping events where the rider sets themselves up all straight and confident and rides proudly towards the first fence and then the horse just stops...and flatly refuses to jump...again, and again and again.

For if the character of mankind be not changed, the futility of God's universal Manifestations would be apparent.

I love that one - I would think the question is pretty well settled by now though, wouldn't you say?

 

[siti]

That is not the case, but sorry I am busy at this time and to address the topics you posted, will take some time and a bit more study.

I will attempt a couple over the next few days if @InvestigateTruth does not get around to it before me.

Regards Tony

Okey dokey then - I shall not hold my breath though.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

@InvestigateTruth - as usual, no substance, just repetition of baseless claims.

OK - where is samsara, where is ahimsa, or moksha, where is the Christian doctrine of atonement, or the resurrection of the dead, where is reincarnation...should I continue? We're just wasting our time - they are not there and they are absolutely key concepts in some of the scriptural traditions you claim are encapsulated in the Iqan. You made the claim - its for you to prove - I have given you a list to start from...maybe pick up where you left off with atonement - where is that? Maybe you could follow your advice to me earlier and make a table: here I'll start it for you - all you need to do is put the links to the online version of Iqan to the paragraph(s) that contain these teachings:

.

Ok, I will answer some now, and when I have time will continue.

.

Teaching Reference

ahimsa

.

For ahimsa, I offer this quote from Iqan:

" He should consume every wayward thought with the flame of His loving mention, and, with the swiftness of lightning, pass
by all else save Him. He should succor the dispossessed, and never withhold his favor from the destitute. He should show kindness to animals, how much more unto his fellowman, to him who is endowed with the power of utterance. He should not hesitate to offer up his life for his Beloved, nor allow the censure of the people to turn him away from the Truth. He should not wish for others that which he doth not wish for himself, nor promise that which he doth not fulfill. With all his heart should the seeker avoid fellowship with evildoers, and pray for the remission of their sins. He should forgive the sinful, and never despise his low estate, for none knoweth what his own end shall be."

.

atonement
.

I have already quoted related parts from Iqan. I showed you even Buddha had sacrificed Himself many times.

.

moksha
reincarnation
samsara
.

Refer to the pages of this quote:

"O brother, behold how the inner mysteries of “rebirth,” of “return,” and of “resurrection” have each, through these all-sufficing, these unanswerable, and conclusive utterances, been unveiled
and unraveled before thine eyes. God grant that through His gracious and invisible assistance,
thou mayest divest thy body and soul of the old garment, and array thyself with the new and imperishable attire."


.

resurrection of the dead
.

"It is through the abundant grace of these Symbols of Detachment that the Spirit of life everlasting is breathed into the bodies of the dead. "

That will do for now...if you can prove at least these are all there in Iqan, perhaps we can then delve a little more into it.

Ok.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Ok, we need to investigate and see if Bahaullah studied Religions in details. When and where did Bahaullah studied Islam, Christianity, Buddhism,...etc, to know their details, and come up with a Book that has all scriptures condensed in it? The difference between Bahaullah and Muhammad is Time! Bahaullah is much closer to us in time, than Muhammad, and details of history is much better known about Him, than Muhammad. So, according to History, when, and where He studied religions?

He's just a guy who pulled it all out of his ***.

It's pretty clear to most people his interpretations are pretty far off base and not all that accurate.

Not that such interpretations really mean anything with anyone who's not a Baha'i.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

OK - so that then presumably means that Baha'u'llah did not intend his claim to be understood in such a literalistic fashion. Perhaps when he said it contains "all scripture" - he did not mean what your friend IT suggested in the OP at all.

Perhaps what he meant was, the key to understanding "all scripture" was contained in the Iqan.

And that's quite a different proposition. And a very different - and possibly even meaningful interfaith discussion.

This is the context of the quote,

"...The one God is My witness! Wert thou to ponder a while, thou wilt recognize that, apart from all these established truths and above-mentioned evidences, the repudiation, cursing, and execration, pronounced by the people of the earth, are in themselves the mightiest proof and the surest testimony of the truth of these heroes of the field of resignation and detachment. Whenever thou dost meditate upon the cavils uttered by all the people, be they divines, learned or ignorant, the firmer and the more steadfast wilt thou grow in the Faith. For whatsoever hath come to pass, hath been prophesied by them who are the Mines of divine knowledge, and Recipients of God’s eternal law. Although We did not intend to make mention of the traditions of a bygone age, yet, because of Our love for thee, We will cite a few which are applicable to Our argument. We do not feel their necessity, however, inasmuch as the things We have already mentioned suffice the world and all that is therein. In fact, all the Scriptures and the mysteries thereof are condensed into this brief account. So much so, that were a person to ponder it a while in his heart, he would discover from all that hath been said the mysteries of the Words of God, and would apprehend the meaning of whatever hath been manifested by that ideal King...."

It does say the Scriptures and Mysteries that comes from the 'Words of God', it does not say peoples popular interpretation of the scriptures, which then can become the teachings of men and not the Messenger.

Personally I think it is much like the 'Hidden Words' where Baha'u'llah has said;

He Is the Glory of Glories "This is that which hath descended from the realm of glory, uttered by the tongue of power and might, and revealed unto the Prophets of old. We have taken the inner essence thereof and clothed it in the garment of brevity, as a token of grace unto the righteous, that they may stand faithful unto the Covenant of God, may fulfill in their lives His trust, and in the realm of spirit obtain the gem of divine virtue" (The Hidden Words) www.bahai.org/r/642922139

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

He's just a guy who pulled it all out of his ***.

It's pretty clear to most people his interpretations are pretty far off base and not all that accurate.

Not that such interpretations really mean anything with anyone who's not a Baha'i.

Many Muslim Mulla also used to say such things, especially those that were most learned when Baha'u'llah quoted a tradition they had not heard of. Each time they tried to show Baha'u'llah was wrong, they instead found that Baha'u'llah had correctly quoted a little know tradition. So then they had to stop trying to refute the wisdom, it just showed their lack of knowledge, they instead, had to start using other excuses, some like your attempt.

On the other hand the amount of Mullas and learned of Islam (and other faiths) that saw the wisdom in what Baha'u'llah offered and embraced the new message (also the Bab) has not been witnessed in Faiths prior.

Finding out about all this takes a just search. One could choose to do just that.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Moksha, Samsara

There is such a wide and diverse understanding across Hinduism and Buddhisim and other Faiths with these two, that one would have to break it down to some key aspects, or Preferably quote the 'Word of God' the teachings have come from.

Regards Tony