Vasspaan

DENIAL isn't a river in EGYPT

by Nur-i-Azal on Thu Dec 17, 2009 08:37 PM PST

There is no fight between Bahais and non...esp Azali/bayani

Could've fooled me!

 

 The Bahai faith is the second most widespread religion in the world.

Empty euphemism. Bahaism is an NRM (new religious movement) and not recognized within any sociology of religion category as a long established Tradition, and so is not a World Religion. You might have wide geographic representation, but that number is insignificant in real distribution and so numbers. As such the second most widespread religion is not Bahaism, but either Christianity or Islam, followed by Buddhism in 3rd place. In terms of distribution, both Scientology and the Sai Baba cult as NRMs are fast outpacing you, and, whether true or not, Sai Baba claims something like 12 million  plus adherents.

 

If the Bahai Religion was alowed to defend and inform about itself, you
would be astonished as to how many peole it would attract.

You have been amply allowed to defend yourself and to inform the general public completely unhindered over the past 30 years in the West. You also have at least two active lobby groups in Washington DC, as well as an All-Parliamentary Bahai body in the UK, not to mention a similar one in the EU. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent over the past decade alone by your organization with Infomercials in North America and you have milked the situation in Iran to your benefit in the media for everything it is worth, and then some. In the '90s billions of dollars was raised and spent by your organization in building a meglomaniacal religious Disneyland-like theme park on top of Mt Carmel. With all of this, not only have you not attracted an overwhelming number to your organization, but you actually lost a significant number of able bodied people from your organization; this, as your organization continues its downward spiral of becoming more and more moribund with each passing day.

 

 That is why the IRi and the "hojjy" boys are scared stiff of the influence of a defenseless minority,

The mullahs and the hajji-boys have never had anything to fear from your organization because they know that in the ideological department you pose no significant threat to them. In fact on a certain business level members of your organization have dealt quite well with this crowd  for mutual financial benefit over the past 30 years, whether in Iran itself, in the Emirates or elsewhere.

 

May i suggest you read some Dr Soroush's recent and more enlightened  articles with its refernces to the Bahai Faith.

Could you please cite the articles of Dr. Abdolkarim Soroush you are referring to? I avidly follow Soroush and have pretty much read everything he's written over the past 20 years. He's made occasional passing reference to Bahaism (as well as Babism), but not in the sort of glowing terms that you are trying to paint it here.

"Whatever is a lie and has

by diamondsouled on Thu Dec 17, 2009 07:31 PM PST

"Whatever is a lie and has a corrupt foundation, eventually falls and crumbles."

Very true Faryar.

It is as well true that noble concepts stand all on their own, without the need of any encumbrance from limiting religious doctrines or dogmas. Doctrines and dogmas such as the Baha'i belief that other human beings can be spiritually diseased, spiritual lepers:

Shun Entirely All Covenant-breakers.

Bahá'u'lláh and the Master in many places and very emphatically have told us to shun entirely all Covenant-breakers as they are afflicted with what we might try and define as a contagious spiritual disease; they have also told us, however, to pray for them.

(Compilations, Principles of Bahai Administration, p. 22)

If Baha'is are truly interested in humanities oneness they need to rid themselves of such antiquated and counterproductive religious beliefs as the above. Beliefs which compromise the true oneness of humanity, beliefs which dehumanize others simply because their human interpretations differ. 

Yes Faryar such obsolete Baha'i beliefs and religious practices will eventually fall and crumble.

Cheers

Larry Rowe 

* بت شکن ن

faryarm
Thu Dec 17, 2009 05:19 PM PST

Dear "Bot"

There is no fight between Bahais and non...esp Azali/bayani

Time has solved any issue..

The Bottom line is 

Whatever is True, Lasts, and

Whatever is a l ie and has a corrupt foundation, eventually falls and crumbles.

By all accounts and as you may have heard The Bahai faith is no longer an abscure Persian religion and despite the enmity of Seven Shahs, two Turkish Sultans. not to mention the Shia establishment, including all the efforts of the Hojjatiyyis, the Raddiyyihs, persecutions, arrsts, torture and kilings, The Bahai faith is the second most widespread religion in the world.

If the Bahai Religion was alowed to defend and inform about itself, you would be astonished as to how many peole it would attract.

That is why the IRi and the "hojjy" boys are scared stiff of the influence of a defenseless minority, which has gained more respect from the rest of the world then from its own homeland.

As I always say, time is the best test...

The fate of the other two are quite obvious, would you agree?

 

best

Faryar

 

PS..

May i suggest you read some Dr Soroush's recent and more enlightened  articles with its refernces to the Bahai Faith.

 

E.G. Browne, ALM Nicloas,

by diamondsouled on Wed Dec 16, 2009 06:03 PM PST

E.G. Browne, ALM Nicloas, Aleksander
Tumanski, Ernst Renan , Denis Maceoin , SG Wilson , August Strensand ,
Vance Salisbury , William Miller, Muhit Tabatabai , Mohammad Qazvini ,
Fereydoun Adamiyat and Homa Nateq did not lie..

Their Azali sources LIED.

----

Actually Faryar E.G.Brown had Baha'is who were living in Akka at the time of the murder of the seven Bayanis as his sources as well. It was from one of those Baha'is that he was informed of the true number of Bayanis that were murdered and the true number of Baha'is who took part in those murders.

To this day Baha'ism claims that it was only three Bayanis that were murdered by seven Baha'is when in actuality it was seven Bayanis who were murdered by twelve Baha'is. At least this is what E.G.Browne's  Baha'i source who was present in Akka at the time informed him.

There is the facade that is the Baha'i World Faith Faryar but behind that facade is the ever narrowing cult of Baha'ism.

Baha'ism likes to present to the world a false image that it is a world religion equal to Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism ... , when in reality it is a minor cult less significant than Mormonism, Jehovah Witnessism, Seventh Day Adventism. It also puts forth the false image that it is truly interested in interfaith relations when in reality true ecumenism is feared by the cult of Baha'ism because it interfers in it's goals of religious triumphalism and the supplanting of all previous world religions.

Why do you think that the Haifan Baha'i sect maintains that there are close to three million Baha'is in India when in reality there are less than 200,000 people in India that truly consider themselves to be Baha'i? Because the Haifan Universal House of Justice needs to maintain the illusion of the growth of Baha'ism when in fact it's membership has been stagnant or declining in most parts of the world since the early 1980s.

The reality is Faryar that your UHJ over ruled Shoghi Effendi's requirement that those who sign Baha'i declaration cards have to pledge absolute loyalty to Baha'ism's administrative order and the founders of Baha'ism. All that is required to be counted as a Baha'i in India is to sign or mark a piece of paper that states that a person believes that Mirza Husayn Ali Baha was an Avatar. Thing is Hindus believe that Buddha was an Avatar as well but this does not make them Buddhists.

The greater majority of Hindus in India who have signed such declarations are still practicing Hindus. The UHJ's claims that there are some three million Baha'is in India being an outright fabrication and lie.

Independently investigate even this one truth, this one fact, Faryar. That is if you are truly interested in the truth and have not completely abandoned the independent search for that truth to those who you see as your spiritual masters.

I'll even be so kind as to share with you a place to begin your investigation of this truth:

"In the late 1990s the Indian Baha'i community claims a
membership of over two million persons, though the reliability of this claim is
complicated by questions over the meaning of signing a "declaration card" in India’s
syncretistic religious atmosphere."

//www.h-net.org/~bahai/bhpapers/india1.htm 

Also I have to wonder about your true motive for refering to Bayanis/Babis as Azalis as well as liers. This is the fruit of religious fanaticism, fanaticism which seeks to justify the dehumanization of other human beings simply because the religious interpretations of those others is diverse.

Cheers

Larry Rowe

Abdolkarim Soroush

by Nur-i-Azal on Wed Dec 16, 2009 02:17 AM PST

Publicly denounced the Hojjatiyyeh decades ago. That's where he is. FYI

 

And the hekayat is not what you related, but what Mowlavi relates in the Masnavi:

 

chon beerangee aseer-i-rang shod

musaa baa 'isaa andar jang shod!

 

Vassalam!

دزد سوم

بت شکن
Wed Dec 16, 2009 01:55 AM PST

دعوای بین ازلی و بهائی حکایت زیر است:

"دو نفر دزد خری دزدیدند

سر تقسیم به هم جنگیدند

آن دو بودند چو گرم زد و خورد

دزد سوّم خرشان را زد و برد"!

 

فقط دلم میخاد چهره بعضی‌ از اعضای گروه حجتیه (سابق) رو میدیدم وقتی دارن دعوای بین شما دوتا رو می‌خونن. عبدالکریم سروش کجایی؟

No, they did not lie. Bahai sources are embellished all the way

by Nur-i-Azal on Wed Dec 16, 2009 02:30 AM PST

The credibility of the sources speaks for itself. The Baha'is have tried unsuccessfully for the past century to cast aspersions on these sources and have failed miserably precisely where it counts because the source criticism itself has proven such sources critically unassailable. And waves of the hand does not change this fact whatsoever.

 

Regardless, whether its Browne, Tumanski, Miller, Tabatabi Adamiyat etc;

Time and  the miraculous flourishing of a World Wide Bahai community has proven them tragically wrong.

 

This is a logical and argumentative fallacy, Faryar, and it is as nonsensical as saying just because McDonald's is the bigger corporation their burgers are also better than Carl's Juniors' or Wendy's or Applebee's! Argument by numbers is a fallacy, bro. It does not address actual content or substance.

 

Who was the source of their information, in those days of Azali animosity against Bahais ?  How balanced is their writings?

The sources were mulitple, Bayanis and non-Bayani alike. There are also the Ottoman police and administrative archives that don't exactly make the Baha'is look good here and actually tend to corrborate the Bayani accounts. Are you going to assert, then, that the Ottoman's were secretly siding with Subh-i-Azal and the Bayanis and embellishing history? If you do, you're going to have to produce pretty good, convincing evidence why so because so far you have nothing but the say so of your own hagiographical sources which aren't corrborated by anyone else independently but yourselves.

Look, I made a public challenge to Turkish Bahai  scholar Necati Alkan about 5 years ago to produce any prima facie dirt directly from the Ottoman archives on Subh-i-Azal and the Bayanis, and he has yet to get back to me, even though he threatened to publish it all over the internet when he found something. I'm still waiting , not to mention everybody else, five and a half (almost six) years later...Nada!

Who was their source? Azalis By any chance?

by faryarm on Tue Dec 15, 2009 11:03 PM PST

With a clear disadvantage of not having Google, 

E.G. Browne, ALM Nicloas, Aleksander Tumanski, Ernst Renan , Denis Maceoin , SG Wilson , August Strensand , Vance Salisbury , William Miller, Muhit Tabatabai , Mohammad Qazvini , Fereydoun Adamiyat and Homa Nateq did not lie..

Their Azali sources LIED. 

Who was the source of their information, in those days of Azali animosity against Bahais ?  How balanced is their writings?

 Regardless, whether its Browne, Tumanski, Miller, Tabatabi Adamiyat etc;

Time and  the miraculous flourishing of a World Wide Bahai community has proven them tragically wrong.

 

"Edward Granville Browne (q.v.) was the first academic to concentrate on the new religion. He travelled to Iran in 1887-8 and subsequently in 1890 to Cyprus to meet Azal and to `Akka to meet Baha'u'llah. He was the first to appreciate and document the nature of the change that had transformed the Babi movement into the Baha'i Faith. He published the results of his researches in a number of papers and books. His later work on this subject was, however, somewhat biased towards the claims of Azal and against the Baha'i position" 

"Equally assiduous in his efforts although concentrating almost exclusively on the Bab was the French consular official and writer, A.-L.-M. Nicolas (q.v.), who had been born and raised in Iran. He wrote a history, Seyyed Ali dit le Bab (Paris, 1905), as well as translating a number of the Bab's most important works. He is also the first to have written at any length on the Shaykhis, Essai sur le Cheikhisme (4 vols., Paris, 1910-1914). Nicolas also adopted a somewhat hostile attitude towards the Baha'i although not adopting the same pro-Azali position that Browne had done. However it is reported that late in life, he was reconciled to the Baha'is." 

 

 

So...

by Nur-i-Azal on Tue Dec 15, 2009 09:02 PM PST

So you are saying E.G. Browne has lied, ALM Nicloas has lied, Aleksander Tumanski has lied, Ernst Renan has lied, Denis Maceoin has lied, SG Wilson has lied, August Strensand has lied, Vance Salisbury has lied, William Miller has lied, Muhit Tabatabai has lied, Mohammad Qazvini has lied, Fereydoun Adamiyat and Homa Nateq have lied etc etc etc etc etc?????? C'mon, man, that many scholars cannot maintain the same lie, documented with the same sources, adduced by the same proofs, indicating the same crimes with the same prima facie evidence, unless, that is, you are asserting a global conspiracy of wide proportions specifically against you, which can be easily disproven in any case. The fact is time and time again the critical historians as well as the apostates have adduced the same proofs and come to the same fundamental conclusions with the same evidence. All of them, without exception, have attested that it is Bahai historiography, or rather hagiography and pseudo-history, that is doing all the lying here and not them or the actual evidence. And, oh, btw...

Response is always the same...

by faryarm on Tue Dec 15, 2009 08:45 PM PST

Response is always the same , because its the same repeated lies.

 Time after time after time. How many times can anyone plausibly lie ?

Have the lies and fabrications of the last 150 years helped you?

Did they help Azal, Muhammad Ali, Remey etc etc ?? 

Where are they now?

Has 150 years of lies helped you?

by faryarm on Tue Dec 15, 2009 08:41 PM PST

Has 150 years of lies helped you?

Put up as many blogs and  distortions, obscure "quotes"and  lies as you wish;

You are no different to the Azali forgers of the past;

You failure is a Divine Promise; look around you.

PS. Nima,

If Bahais were criminals; if murder, vilolence and revenge were a Bahai Trait; they would never have remained the lamb to the slaughter by the Mullahs and today the IRI.

If The Bahai Faith taught hate and violence, It would have died out, just as The Azali-"Bayanis" faded even before his death, never mind after his  lonely death as a "muslim" "holyman".

If Bahais were criminals, you would have been one of the first to "know" :)

But perhaps i should be worried with your threats...? 

 

 

"you chose to not mention

by diamondsouled on Tue Dec 15, 2009 04:54 PM PST

"you chose to not mention  Baha'u'llah's  as  having "counselled them most emphatically to shun all violence and retaliation....""

Howdy Faryarm,

I did mention: "chose to disregard Bahá'u'lláh's strong injunction", thing is Faryarm that this is only one version of what occured at that meeting, the sanitized Baha'i version. In the memoirs of the person who asked Husayn Ali for permission to murder those seven Bayanis Husayn Ali gave his implicit OK by smiling and implying that he would be pleased.

Which version is true? A court of law would have to decide that Faryarm.

What isn't disputed though is that Husayn Ali was informed of his followers plans to commit those murders and did nothing effective to prevent those murders from taking place. This makes him at least complicit in those murders and since he repeatedly incited those followers to a hatred of those Babis who chose to not accept his messianic claims I would say that a court of law today would find him to be at least an accessory to those murders. 

Also Abbas Effendi's paying off of the authorities for the early release of those murderers is further evidence that neither he or his father had any real problem with those murders having taken place.

When cultists dehumanize other fellow human beings by referring to them as spiritually diseased, as being antichrists, such violence is bound to occur.

Cheers

Larry Rowe

Historical whitewash, bs and more whitewash...

by Nur-i-Azal on Mon Dec 14, 2009 09:21 PM PST

F: Why not put into context Baha'u'llah as a prisoner?

Because the context of his prisonser status had to do with the murders he ordered against the Bayanis in Edirne, and not for any other reason.

 

F: you chose to not mention  Baha'u'llah's  as  having "counselled them most emphatically to shun all violence and retaliation...."

"O phlebotomist of the Divine Unity! Throb like the artery in the body of the Contingent World, and drink of the blood of the Block of Heedlessness for that he turned aside from the aspect of thy Lord the Merciful!" - BAHA'U'LLAH

So much for counselling.

F: Why not tell the story of Baha'u'llah's interrogation by the
"Mutasarif" of Akka and  the subsequent reprimand  by the Turkish
Governor     Would you like me to put up the text of the Ottoman police interrogation translated by Necati Alkan up as a blog here?  

The rest of your ridiculous sectarian rant and bigotry is too ridiculous for comment, Faryar. Seriously...

 

I worry about you, man. Baavar kon!

Language, Faryar.

by sophia on Mon Dec 14, 2009 08:51 PM PST

Faryar: "Distortion, Malicious and Dishonest."

It appears that wether it's debates about the Faith's history, or more serious allegations, the response is always the same. 

//altreligion.about.com/b/2009/05/13/scientology-its-always-someone-elses-fault.htm 

"I've tried finding the Church's side in similar accusations. Unfortunately, it's more of the same: accusers are malicious individuals, often disgruntled ex-members, who seek to harm the Church through lies and distortion. Time after time after time. How many times can anyone plausibly believe that?

Distortion, Malicious and Dishonest.

by faryarm on Mon Dec 14, 2009 08:26 PM PST

Distortion, Malicious and Dishonest.

There is a lot more to this. Why is your quote from Balyuzi, so selective?

Why not mention the whole paragraph?

Why not put into context Baha'u'llah as a prisoner?

you chose to not mention  Baha'u'llah's  as  having "counselled them most emphatically to shun all violence and retaliation...."

Why not tell the story of Baha'u'llah's interrogation by the "Mutasarif" of Akka and  the subsequent reprimand  by the Turkish Governor, who in turn apologised to Baha'u'llah for their "high handed treatment".

After 35 years, What can possibly be the cause of such folly, but a "welter of emotions that has blinded  your judgment and led you "far astray."

A common condition  described  as "The weakness of the human heart, which so often attaches itself to an unworthy object, the weakness of the human mind, prone to conceit and self-assurance in personal opinions..." 

 

     "For the harbouring of an evil purpose is a disease which shuts out the individual from all the blessings of Heaven, and casts him deep into the pit of perdition, of utter ruin.

The point to make is that anyone, high or low, rich or poor, learned or unlettered, although to all appearances he may be a jewel among men, and the fine flower of all that is best -- if he gives utterance to some pronouncement or speaks some word from which can be detected the scent of self-worship, or a malicious and evil purpose, his aim is to disintegrate the Word of God and disperse the gathering of the people of Baha. From such individuals it is a solemn obligation to turn away; it is an inescapable duty to pay no heed whatever to their claims."

The Messiah of Shiraz

by Nur-i-Azal on Mon Dec 14, 2009 07:32 PM PST

The following publication was published earlier this year by EJ Brill. It contains a minimally revised version of Denis Maceoin's Cambridge Ph.D dissertation of 1979 From Shaykhism to Babism and all his assorted Babi related articles and monographs under a single cover. It's a 738+ page tome and worth the investment, albeit a mighty pricey one (no thanks to Brill and their well established practice of setting the highest prices in the market).

Hello Azal, Having been a

by diamondsouled on Mon Dec 14, 2009 10:01 AM PST

Hello Azal,

Having been a Baha'i for 35 years before resigning five years ago and having several times read Shoghi Effendi's The Dawn Breakers as well as his God Passes By I found this paper very interesting and illuminating.

How Baha'ism went from an outright aversion to Babism, as clearly expressed by both Mirza Husayn Ali (alias Baha'u'llah) and his son Abbas Effendi (alias Abdu'l-Baha') to a wholesale coopting of Babism into the history of Baha'ism as expressed by Shoghi Effendi is a real eye opener.

When I first read Orientalist Edward G Browne's accounts of early Baha'i aggression towards, and even murder of, Babis it made no sense to me. After reading about what Husayn Ali's and Abbas Effendi's true opinions of Babism was it made perfect sense.

Also when finding out that Husayn Ali was actually informed* of his followers plans to murder seven Bayanis/Babis at the gate in Akka but did nothing effective to prevent those murders from taking place I was at first surprised. I am no longer surprised.

Cheers

Larry Rowe

*

Muhammad-Javad relates that he was present, when Aqa Muhammad-Ibrahim-i-Kashani was pleading with Bahá'u'lláh for permission to eliminate Siyyid Muhammad-i-Isfahani and his associates. ...

Seven of the companions, Aqa Muhammad-Ibrahim-i-Nazir, Mirza Husayn-i-Najjar (another native of Kashan), Aqa Husayn-i-Ashchi (also of Kashan), Mirza Ja'far of Yazd, Ustad Ahmad-i-Najjar, Aqa Muhammad-'Aliy-i-Salmani and Ustad 'Abdu'l-Karim-i-Kharrat, both of Isfahan, chose to disregard Bahá'u'lláh's strong injunction and began plotting to rid 'Akká and the exiles of the incubus of those evil men ...

Despite all this, these seven men persisted in their plans and committed those foul murders. Thus died Siyyid Muhammad-i-Isfahani, the Antichrist of the Bahá'í Revelation; the irredeemable Aqa Jan-i-Kaj-Kulah, the right-hand man of Siyyid Muhammad from the days of Adrianople; and the fickle Mirza Rida-Quliy-i-Tafrishi.

(H.M. Balyuzi, Baha'u'llah - The King of Glory, p. 325)