• 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!

Questions for knowledgeable Bahai / followers of Baha'u'llah

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
Baha'is claims do not rely on the Bab. Do you really think and Jews or Christian gives a twit about the Bab? They do not even recognize the Bab as anyone. The Bab only has significance to Muslims because He claimed to be the promised Mahdi.

Sure, I agree with that.

Followers of X dispensation do not care about the one after them.

Unless we're talking about some kind of universalists, then a Christian for example will either not accept Muhammad, might appreciate him, or might even despise him and think he's the antichrist (yet with no logical reason, only emotional).

I totally get that.


Here's the thing. According to the Babi/Bayani dispensation, we are still in it. The Babi/Bayani dispensation has a set time on it, if someone claims to be the promised one before the time set by The Bab, then according to The Bab he is not the promised one.

This is different to the prophecies given by Jesus and Muhammad for instance, which said that 'only God knows when, not I'. The Bayan was completely different because it gave a full prophetic view of how long it would last and how well it would spread.
Baha'u'llah contradicts this in the worst manner.

I know that Baha'i's don't rely on The Bab, this is kind of my point because a "Manifestation of God" is validated by the previous manifestation.
Baha'u'llah however is not validated by The Bab, it is the opposite.

For this and many other reasons I know that translations of writings of The Bab are practically non-existent for Baha'i's. Of course there are some scholars who have translated it, but the only work of The Bab in the current English Baha'i canon is "Selections from the writings of The Bab" which doesn't even include whole works of The Bab and has sections that aren't even from the works they claim to be from (basically fabrications).
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
The Baha'i cult is not an answer to the Babi/Bayani dispensation, it's rather a clear attempt to subdue and undermine it.
That Dispensation
I do not see that is what the Bab is saying. That is only YOUR INTERPRETATION of the words.
 

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
Quote the Bab saying that. Otherwise it is just YOUR INTERPRETATION of what the Bab said, what you want to believe. I want to believe what is true, whatever that is, how about you?

Hey, you're free to your beliefs and your religion. I am not stopping you from anything.

I'm just giving critical and necessary reflections on the situation, seeing that this is a critical thread.

I'm not a Baha'i, and not even a Babi/Bayani. I'm a Muslim with a very high level of respect, love and appreciation for The Bab and the Bayan.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
A moment of silence for how comedy gold this post is. :tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy:
This is the kind of response I always get when people cannot prove what they are claiming, deflection and obfuscation.

Prove that the accounts of Baha'i history are incorrect. Otherwise do not claim it.

P.S. I have covered this ground before, with an atheist who was making the same claims, so I know what is on it.
 

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
I do not see that is what the Bab is saying. That is only YOUR INTERPRETATION of the words.

What do you mean "your interpretation"? I'm literally pasting passages from The Bab himself without inserting anything of my own, how is that "my interpretation"?

If I go to Surah Ikhlas from the Holy Qur'an and quote the first ayat:

"Say, ‘He is God, the One."

That is not "my interpretation"? :rolleyes:

Further explanation of what the term One (Ahad) means in Arabic in distinction from One as a number in English would be required for a full understanding, but I haven't added anything by quoting the verse/ayat.
Just as with my quotations of The Bab above, which state the same thing multiple times.
The Bab mentions 1511 and 2001 as time periods which the Bayanic dispensation will last, multiple times, both in the Persian Bayan and in other writings.
 

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
This is the kind of response I always get when people cannot prove what they are claiming, deflection and obfuscation.

Prove that the accounts of Baha'i history are incorrect. Otherwise do not claim it.

P.S. I have covered this ground before, with an atheist who was making the same claims, so I know what is on it.

Yet as Baha'i's do, if a non-Baha'i scholar on Babi and Baha'i history is quoted, you will reject it for not being authenticated by your Baha'i authorities, so it's a trick question isn't it?

I'd recommend you start with digging into "The Messiah of Shiraz" by Denis MacEoin, which gives a relatively neutral overview of the entire situation. Once you've read that, I'll recommend you further reading.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
This is different to the prophecies given by Jesus and Muhammad for instance, which said that 'only God knows when, not I'. The Bayan was completely different because it gave a full prophetic view of how long it would last and how well it would spread.
I do not see that in what you quoted. There is no such clarity as you claim.

Besides that, how can I know that is an accurate translation into English?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
What do you mean "your interpretation"? I'm literally pasting passages from The Bab himself without inserting anything of my own, how is that "my interpretation"?
That is exactly what Christians say about the Bible.

They say "the Bible says." Then I tell them that the Bible does not SAY anything at all. It is just words on a page until we read it and interpret it and figure out WHAT THOSE WORDS MEAN. Those words will mean different things to different people because all people read and interpret the words from their own individual perspective. That is why Christians do not agree on what the Bible means and that is why there are so many denominations of Christianity.

Do all Muslims believe what you do about the Bab? I rest my case.
 

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
I do not see that in what you quoted. There is no such clarity as you claim.

Yes there is, he says many times that the dispensation will last between 1511 and 2001 years. It doesn't get clearer than that.

Again, by comparison Jesus said (paraphrasing) "Nobody knows the hour or the time", and the Qur'an says (paraphrasing) "the Prophet knows only what is revealed to him, only God knows when the Qiyamah will occur". etc.
The Bayan stands in stark contrast to this for the aforementioned reason.

Besides that, how can I know that is an accurate translation into English?

Compare translations from the first two vahids of the Persian Bayan (there are a few translations floating around, some of which your own Baha'i sites host, despite not being "officially authenticated" by them).
Get someone who fluently reads Persian to translate parts from the quoted sections but from the Persian text and see if it's correct.
 

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
That is exactly what Christians say about the Bible.

They say "the Bible says." Then I tell them that the Bible does not SAY anything at all. It is just words on a page until we read it and interpret it and figure out WHAT THOSE WORDS MEAN. Those words will mean different things to different people because all people read and interpret the words from their own individual perspective. That is why Christians do not agree on what the Bible means and that is why there are so many denominations of Christianity.

I'm not quoting one or two sentences, I'm quoting paragraphs, of which are explicitly about He Whom God Shall Make Manifest. There is a big difference when paragraphs are quoted, in contrast to individual sentences which can easily be taken out of context. I can easily quote the surrounding passages to those paragraphs if it helps, but the essential idea is communicated in what I quoted.

I do agree with you by what you say about Christianity, and I deeply loathe that. However I feel Baha'i's are quite the same when quoting The Bab. And when trying to find prophecies of Baha'u'llah in ancient abrogated dispensations.

Do all Muslims believe what you do about the Bab? I rest my case.

No they don't. Even hyper-Batini (esoteric) Shi'ites, and even Sufi Shi'ites, have an aversion towards The Bab for the reason that his tradition broke outside of normative Islam, it claimed new revelation of some form. This is heavily heretical to the normative Islamic position, and I don't blame them for taking such views.
I am very fascinated and interested in The Bab for a lot of reasons, I don't hold any hostility towards him, I am very much allured by how he expounds Batini (esoteric) Twelver Shi'ite tradition, and how he relates to Shi'ite Esotericism and Shi'ite Gnosticism (Marifa/Irfan).
The Bab is a thrill for me because I am an occultist at heart (and wouldn't be a Muslim, let alone interested in religion at all, if it wasn't first for my love of the Occult which lead me to taking religion more seriously in a different manner).
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Yet as Baha'i's do, if a non-Baha'i scholar on Babi and Baha'i history is quoted, you will reject it for not being authenticated by your Baha'i authorities, so it's a trick question isn't it?
No, I just want to know the truth, whatever it is. That is why I asked the question.
I'd recommend you start with digging into "The Messiah of Shiraz" by Denis MacEoin, which gives a relatively neutral overview of the entire situation. Once you've read that, I'll recommend you further reading.
I know all about Denis MacEoin. He is hardly neutral.
 
Last edited:

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
know all about Denis MacEoin. He is hardly neutral.

Have you read his book? that is the question.

Are you able to fruitfully take in knowledge from a source that may not entirely gel with your accepted dogmas? that's the question. Because we're dealing with history here, not merely just doctrine and dogma.
Baha'i's have a dogmatic history, not a historic history. You cannot expect an unbiased look at Babi/Bayani history through the Baha'i lens, to expect such a thing is asinine and foolishly naive. Baha'i history is deeply seated in dogmatic biases, such as the defamation they spout against Subh-i-Azal.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Yes there is, he says many times that the dispensation will last between 1511 and 2001 years. It doesn't get clearer than that.
Even if that was true, that could have more than one meaning and more than one impication.

For example, we could be living in the Dispensation of the Bab even if Baha'u'llah was the return of Christ and the Promised One of all the religions, since it was the Bab who ushered in this entire religious cycle.
 

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
Even if that was true, that could have more than one meaning and more than one impication.

For example, we could be living in the Dispensation of the Bab even if Baha'u'llah was the return of Christ and the Promised One of all the religions, since it was the Bab who ushered in this entire religious cycle.

Therein is the error I mentioned to Tony. The Bayan is supposed to have matured and reached it's height by the time He Whom God Shall Make Manifest is supposed to turn up. The Babi/Bayani dispensation has not become a widely-practiced, world-wide phenomena as of the present. That simply did not happen yet.
So to expect He Whom God Shall Make Manifest, from the Babi/Bayani POV to appear yet is completely unrealistic and exactly what The Bab said wouldn't happen yet.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Have you read his book? that is the question.
No, I have not but I have read some of his articles.
Are you able to fruitfully take in knowledge from a source that may not entirely gel with your accepted dogmas?
that's the question. Because we're dealing with history here, not merely just doctrine and dogma.
Oh are we? Or are we dealing with one man's "take" on the history. If it was actual history, it would be in the history books and taught in schools.

Who is to say that what Denis MacEoin presents is the actual history? Who is to say that he is unbiased? Is it really the history as it actually unfolded? That is the one hundred million dollar question. Prove it is actual history. MacEoin was not a historian.

Denis M. MacEoin (born 26 January 1949) is a British analyst and writer. Since 2014 has published at the Gatestone Institute, of which he is a Senior Fellow, a number of essays on current events with a Middle Eastern focus. ... As a novelist, MacEoin writes under the pen names Daniel Easterman and Jonathan Aycliffe.

Denis MacEoin - Wikipedia

Baha'i's have a dogmatic history, not a historic history.
Present the historic history and prove it actually happened as you believe it did.
Then I will walk away from the Baha'i Faith.

You cannot expect an unbiased look at Babi/Bayani history through the Baha'i lens, to expect such a thing is asinine and foolishly naive. Baha'i history is deeply seated in dogmatic biases, such as the defamation they spout against Subh-i-Azal.
And we cannot expect to get an unbiased look at Babi/Bayani history from someone who opposes the Baha'i Faith. This is logic 101 stuff.

Can you prove that Subh-i-Azal did not do what is chronicled in Baha'i history, or is it just a personal opinion?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I'm not quoting one or two sentences, I'm quoting paragraphs, of which are explicitly about He Whom God Shall Make Manifest. There is a big difference when paragraphs are quoted, in contrast to individual sentences which can easily be taken out of context. I can easily quote the surrounding passages to those paragraphs if it helps, but the essential idea is communicated in what I quoted.
That is very true. The sentences need to be read in context. I am at a disadvantage because I do not have an English translation that I know is accurate so that is why I generally do not talk about the Bab and how how He fits in with the Baha'i Faith. I do not rely upon prophecies for proof of who Baha'u'llah was because they can be so easily misinterpreted, although some of the OT prophecies are so specific that they point directly to Baha'u'llah.
I do agree with you by what you say about Christianity, and I deeply loathe that. However I feel Baha'i's are quite the same when quoting The Bab. And when trying to find prophecies of Baha'u'llah in ancient abrogated dispensations.
So are to saying that you do not believe any of the OT prophecies or NT prophecies are accurate? That would open up a whole can of worms. And why should Jews believe in Jesus or the NT and why should any Christians believe in Muhammad or that the Qur'an came from God? Do you see the problem?

All these are beliefs and none of them can be proven to have come from any God, so it is simply a matter of what people consider evidence, if they even care about evidence, and what they choose to believe. It is also a matter of how people think, be it logically or from emotion. I tend to think logically because I have no emotional attachment to the Bahai Faith. I believe in it because of the evidence that indicates it is the truth.
No they don't. Even hyper-Batini (esoteric) Shi'ites, and even Sufi Shi'ites, have an aversion towards The Bab for the reason that his tradition broke outside of normative Islam, it claimed new revelation of some form. This is heavily heretical to the normative Islamic position, and I don't blame them for taking such views.
I am very fascinated and interested in The Bab for a lot of reasons, I don't hold any hostility towards him, I am very much allured by how he expounds Batini (esoteric) Twelver Shi'ite tradition, and how he relates to Shi'ite Esotericism and Shi'ite Gnosticism (Marifa/Irfan).
The Bab is a thrill for me because I am an occultist at heart (and wouldn't be a Muslim, let alone interested in religion at all, if it wasn't first for my love of the Occult which lead me to taking religion more seriously in a different manner).
That's fascinating. What do you mean by an occultist and how does that fit in with Islam?

It is too bad we do not have more Writings of the Bab translated into English, but I am not going to assume a Baha'i conspiracy because that is not just, since there is no evidence of a conspiracy, and also because it makes no logical sense that the entire Baha'i Faith is based upon deception and a cover-up.

In short, the Baha'i Faith makes the most logical sense to me because it embraces all the past religions as the truth from God and it contains the teachings and laws and the message of the unity of mankind that I believe humanity needs in this new age.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
The Babi/Bayani dispensation has not become a widely-practiced, world-wide phenomena as of the present. That simply did not happen yet.
How do you believe that is ever going to happen? For the sake of argument, let's just say that we are living under the Dispensation of the Bab. How do you think everyone is going to come to recognize the Bab? He did even not fulfill the prophecies for the return of Christ. Do you think that Muslims are all going to suddenly recognize the station of the Bab and start following the Bayan instead of the Qur'an?
Therein is the error I mentioned to Tony. The Bayan is supposed to have matured and reached it's height by the time He Whom God Shall Make Manifest is supposed to turn up.
So to expect He Whom God Shall Make Manifest, from the Babi/Bayani POV to appear yet is completely unrealistic and exactly what The Bab said wouldn't happen yet.
Then how can you explain the respite of nineteen years?

"I, indeed, beg to address Him Whom God shall make manifest, by Thy leave in these words: ‘Shouldst Thou dismiss the entire company of the followers of the Bayán in the Day of the Latter Resurrection by a mere sign of Thy finger even while still a suckling babe, Thou wouldst indeed be praised in Thy indication. And though no doubt is there about it, do Thou grant a respite of nineteen years as a token of Thy favour so that those who have embraced this Cause may be graciously rewarded by Thee. Thou art verily the Lord of grace abounding."
 

TransmutingSoul

One Planet, One People, Please!
Premium Member
Yes 19 years is a very sacred number in the Bayan, that's not disputed.

The Bab says multiple times in the Persian Bayan that the dispensation of the Bayan would last between 1511 and 2001 years.
A dispensation needs a lot of time to mature, 9 years is not time for a dispensation to mature. 9 years leaves the dispensation in a state of obscurity, this is very much a fact with what the Baha'i cult has done to the Bayani/Babi religion. You take credit for the Bab but don't give him and his dispensation any say or attention. The Bab is merely a footnote in your cult, Subh-i-Azal is turned into the bad guy. This is utterly ridiculous.

I'll repeat it again: 20 years is not enough time for a dispensation to mature.
20 years is not even enough time for a human being to mature :tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy:
How the heck do you expect the Babi/Bayani dispensation to mature when they were still having to practice Taqiya in Iran, as they still do to this day.

The Baha'i cult is not an answer to the Babi/Bayani dispensation, it's rather a clear attempt to subdue and undermine it. Baha'u'llah himself doesn't even understand the Babi/Bayani religion/doctrine/system very well either.

The passage I quoted in this OP indicated that it was an error for Babi to cling to the Bayan after the One whom God would make Manifest appeared. It said all their works would be brought to naught, if they did not accept the One whom God would make Manifest, which is now so obvious, was Baha'u'llah, As the Bayani have failed to grow and fruit, it is more logical to accept that Baha'u'llah is the vision of the Bayan fulfilled. It really the same as all the Faiths that still cling to scriptures past and have not seen the same gems in the scriptures given subsequent ages and in this age.

One thought is that the Bayan remained an unfinished book and it was given over to the One whom God would make manifest to finish the book, add to and take away from as God so willed. That is very clear in the Bab's writings, so it lends a strong case to Baha'u'llah being that promise. When one reads the works of Baha'u'llah it sings the same song that the Bab (Gate) opened humanity to.

All the best, hope all is well, Regards Tony
 

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
So are to saying that you do not believe any of the OT prophecies or NT prophecies are accurate? That would open up a whole can of worms. And why should Jews believe in Jesus or the NT and why should any Christians believe in Muhammad or that the Qur'an came from God? Do you see the problem?

No, I am saying that in the Bayan, only previous dispensations have any substantial prophetic relevance towards the current dispensation.

Aka, the Torah and Tanakh is only relevant to Christianity, the Gospels are only relevant to Islam (despite Muslim belief in Tahrif which is it's own subject), the Qur'an and Hadith are only relevant to the Bayan, and the Bayan is only relevant to the dispensation of He Whom God Shall Make Manifest.

Baha'u'llah in contrast borrows from all of them and not the one most relevant to the true claimant of the promised one, in fact he mostly ignores the Bayan except for when it suits him.

Do you get me now?

That is very true. The sentences need to be read in context. I am at a disadvantage because I do not have an English translation that I know is accurate so that is why I generally do not talk about the Bab and how how He fits in with the Baha'i Faith. I do not rely upon prophecies for proof of who Baha'u'llah was because they can be so easily misinterpreted, although some of the OT prophecies are so specific that they point directly to Baha'u'llah.

This is an error because of how Baha'i's are taught to see The Bab as merely a John the Baptist figure, rather than a fully established prophetic figure in his own right. It is a false assumption and one that makes no epistemological sense, it results in the fallacy of the assumed conclusion.

That's fascinating. What do you mean by an occultist and how does that fit in with Islam?

Occult is a loaded term but I refer to anything involving mysticism, causing change (whether to one's self or to the outside world), metaphysics in general, experimenting with altered states of consciousness, interacting with entities, digging deep into scriptures, and the general spiritual path itself (which is an attainment of salvation).

In terms of Islam's relation to esotericism and such aforementioned things, I could say very much but it is, like with most religions, an essential core of what it is. However unlike most religions, it has survived in it's original state, as transmitted by Prophet Muhammad through the Twelve Imams, and also through the 49 Ismaili Imams, aka it's passed down through the Ahl al-Bayt. Such key examples include 'ilm al-Huruf (which The Bab is well know for) which is the science of the letters of the Arabic alphabet, that every arabic letter has deep meanings and that interpreting passages of the Qur'an can also be known through this manner, the Twelve Imams are all reported to have taught this in Hadith. This esoteric science has occurred throughout Islamic history, and while downplayed by mainstream Shi'i, is still an essential esoteric teaching of Islam. Most Surahs of the Qur'an open with mysterious letters which are veiled in such mystery, this is one Qur'anic example. Nowadays, 'ilm al-Huruf is typically practiced by Sufis, but it is nonetheless as Shi'i phenomena passed by Muhammad through his progeny.
Other examples include prayer (Salaah) itself and it's meanings, Dhikr (mantra) as well. All of which relate to altered states. Islam is very highly mystical at it's core.

Even Baha'u'llah happens to carry over some of these traits himself.

It is too bad we do not have more Writings of the Bab translated into English, but I am not going to assume a Baha'i conspiracy because that is not just, since there is no evidence of a conspiracy, and also because it makes no logical sense that the entire Baha'i Faith is based upon deception and a cover-up

The question, and the irrational answer, remains that Baha'i's have an entirely limited exposure to The Bab, yet are expected to accept Baha'u'llah without first understanding The Bab.
Though in many senses this is what Christians are like towards Judaism anyway, so it's not particularly a new trait.

I'm a person who studies everything, anyway. I grew up a Christian and have studied Judaism (and continue to study them all), so I am in no way a person of such a type. I have a large library of physical book and an even larger pdf library of books, both scriptures, books about religions and philosophy, politics, psychology etc. Just to get a better understanding of me. I'm a Muslim but I read stuff from all sides of the camp, though I tend to have a strong aversion to anything that is merely just proselytizing (as it offers no value to anybody).

In short, the Baha'i Faith makes the most logical sense to me because it embraces all the past religions as the truth from God and it contains the teachings and laws and the message of the unity of mankind that I believe humanity needs in this new age.

These are all things claimed by the Qur'an itself. I understand why Baha'i appeals to you, though despite the typical negative reputation westerners have towards Islam, it still has the same emphasis in it's sacred texts and claims the same universality.
The Qur'an makes claim to the Primordial tradition of Prophet Adam, via the Prophet Abraham. It calls both the ahl al-Kitab (People of the Book, aka Jews and Christians) to embrace not their own wild variations but rather to understand the significance of Abraham as the substantiator of the universal religion. As a Revelation of God directly, it claims to be a restoration of this through Prophet Muhammad (who himself is much like Abraham, Moses and David all combined but also containing the esoteric heart of Christianity in it's inward teachings).
Oneness of Humanity and anti-racism is mentioned in various passages of the Qur'an, plus in Prophet Muhammad's farewell sermon.
 

SeekerOnThePath

On a mountain between Nietzsche and Islam
How do you believe that is ever going to happen? For the sake of argument, let's just say that we are living under the Dispensation of the Bab. How do you think everyone is going to come to recognize the Bab? He did even not fulfill the prophecies for the return of Christ. Do you think that Muslims are all going to suddenly recognize the station of the Bab and start following the Bayan instead of the Qur'an?

Well to assume a Babi/Bayani position to answer that (as I'm only a Muslim), you need to have hope. It's 2020 and we have only passed like 2% of the prophesied length of time that the Babi/Bayani dispensation will last. There is much hope, even in spite of what Baha'i's have done to damage the Babis/Bayanis.

Then how can you explain the respite of nineteen years?

"I, indeed, beg to address Him Whom God shall make manifest, by Thy leave in these words: ‘Shouldst Thou dismiss the entire company of the followers of the Bayán in the Day of the Latter Resurrection by a mere sign of Thy finger even while still a suckling babe, Thou wouldst indeed be praised in Thy indication. And though no doubt is there about it, do Thou grant a respite of nineteen years as a token of Thy favour so that those who have embraced this Cause may be graciously rewarded by Thee. Thou art verily the Lord of grace abounding."

Do you know what respite is?
And as this Tablet very incontestably states, it's addressed to somebody not even born yet.
I think it's very amazing, in it's concept, that it is addressed to someone approximately in the year 4000 (definitely not exactly) who is long to be born well after our own time.
 
Top