JamilEghrari

If it walks like a duck and quacks like duck

by Nur-i-Azal on Sun Apr 11, 2010 08:42 AM PDT

By George, we have a duck!

And your response to mine came within 5 minutes which unequivocally says you've been at the trigger ready waiting to respond on the thread here at moment's notice, your naneh man ghareebam-baazee notwithstanding.

Ya NUR

 

I am a User of this website

by Gavazn on Sun Apr 11, 2010 08:35 AM PDT

and can make my own judgments. SO tough if it does not suit you. You are again using the tactic of classifying those that disagree with you as "enemies". Anyway, waste of time to talk with the likes of you. That is going to be my last comment to you NUR.

Shining Bird, good luck if you do want to improve your religion. I think improvements in religons have to come from the people in the religion. Like Islam, we have to improve it ourselves. Kind regards to you.

Dear Dale

by Nur-i-Azal on Sun Apr 11, 2010 08:29 AM PDT

Checked. Check yours now.

Anyway, a word of caution: Gavzn here is the good-cop to sagkoochoolo's bad cop. FYI

Ya NUR

 

Shining Bird and Sag

by Gavazn on Sun Apr 11, 2010 08:31 AM PDT

You are the only persons who have come out of this discussion as a balanced persons. For this Dale Husband to make accusations against people he does not know:

"swallowing all the propaganda the Haifa Baha'i Faith puts out about its critics and react to criticism the same way its members would"

"Your fanatical spirit gives you away. And I don't like being lied to by anyone. "  

"I do NOT trust sag koochooloo at all. "

Did he bother to read Sag's comment at all??? Assumptions and pigeon holing poeple who disgree with him conveniently as his "enemies" = Hafa bahais.  How desperate to be lashing out and calling people names like fanatic and a liar. You really are patheitic.

And what authority are you that we should trust your judgement ? After siding with someone who has been abusive on this website we can see you for what you are. Arrogant and aggressive. 

Thank you, Azal

by Dale_Husband on Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:39 PM PDT

 there is nothing good in Bahaism that isn't already present elsewhere in a more authentic and genuine form.

In my first public critique of the Baha'i Faith, I made the following observation:

//circleh.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/why-i-quit-the-baha%e2%80%99i-faith/

"The Baha’i Faith, which was founded in the 19th Century, looks exactly like what one would expect if one took the most liberal Western political and social concepts of that Century and grafted them onto Shiite Islam."

Good to know I'm not the only one who felt that way. But simular charges have been made against Christianity and Islam. One might argue that the  Messengers of God seldom reveal anything truly new, but seek to revive the original spirit of the religion of God that man allows to fall into ruin repeatedly. To do so, they invent new rituals and reaffirm some of the old values and ideals, such as the Golden Rule.

Please return to Facebook and check your messages.

Dale

by Nur-i-Azal on Sat Apr 10, 2010 08:49 PM PDT

I am not the only person who mistrusts Eric Stetson or what his Unitarian Bahaism is about. Last year an original list member of his UB list on yahoogroups, Ernesto, similarly but independently came to the exact same conclusion as I about Stetson and thereafter left his list while publicly detailing his reasons for so doing. I am happy to put that final message of Ernesto up here or forward it to anyone who so wishes.

That said, there is nothing good in Bahaism that isn't already present elsewhere in a more authentic and genuine form. The world of Iranian spirituality, whether in its Zoroastrian form or in its Sufi/esoteric Shi'a form, not to mention the gnostic religion of the Bayan, is the bedrock and matrix upon which everything that Bahaism claims emerges from. Nothing (no idea, no point of view, no point of departure, no angle, no take on anything, nothing) Bahaism claims is unique to it, emerged from it or originated with it. Anyone who has looked at the the entire corpus of Bahai writings deeply but dispassionately has come to exactly the same conclusion as this. So if this is the case, what need is there for Bahaism? Besides, I do not believe Bahaism is a bona fide religion in the same way Zoroastrianism, Hinduisim, Judaism, Christianity, Islam or the Bayan are religions. For one thing, the very nature of the Bahai concept of the covenant, together with the power structures that prop it up, precludes against the emergence of authentic esotericism and cultures of gnoses. Besides this, there is not a whole lot in the original Bahai writings that supports the kind of full blown esotericism that you find in these other faiths to begin with. From my point of view, this is so because Bahaism from start to finish is counterfeit spirituality (for the reasons stated above) and so nothing but a species of counter-initiation.

In the West especially, however, Bahaism has progressively taken on a sinister Protestant Churchianist and corporatist form: a form that is antagonistically at odds with everything the soul of authentic Iranian spiritual culture represents, not to mention that of esoteric and gnostic (small 'g') spirituality generally. 

Yes, I am a Sufi. But I am a Fatimiya Sufi, which means I am a Neoplatonic Zoroastrian esoteric Twelver  Shi'a Illuminationist (ishraqi) Bayani Hermeticist Kabbalist Tantric Ayahuasquero shaman Goddess-worshiper Neo-Traditionalist Evolian-Corbinian; or in other words, a Perennialist.

 

Ya NUR

As I see it.

by Dale_Husband on Sat Apr 10, 2010 08:22 PM PDT

Both Eric (Shining Bird) and Wahid (Nur-i-Azal) oppose the Haifa based Baha'i Faith, but in different ways. Eric is open minded enough to accept what is good in the Faith and try to reject what he sees as harmful, while Wahid seeks to rid the world of the Faith completely. But my observation is that Wahid's attitude would, if held consistently, would lead to him rejecting completely Islam, Christianity, Judaism, and ANY other great world religion, because they ALL are corrupt, being run authoritatively by humans who have been dishonest and incompetent at times. When I first met Azal in Facebook, I thought he was perhaps an atheist. He recently told me he is a Sufi, which I know little about. But both of them are my friends and I listen to them both .

As for me, I would be quite happy if the Baha'i Faith ceased to exist, and I would also be happy if a century from now most Baha'is were of the Unitarian group. All I want is for the Haifa based version of it to be overthrown, because it is a massive scam. Dismissing me because I sound bitter about my past within it is just disingenuous. You should know better than to do that and it reflects on your own naivety when you do.

sag koochooloo, you say you are not a Baha'i, yet you swallow all the propaganda the Haifa Baha'i Faith puts out about its critics and react to criticism the same way its members would. Therefore, I do not beleive you. Your fanatical spirit gives you away. And I don't like being lied to by anyone.

So I can (provisionally) trust both Eric and Wahid, even if they currently do not trust each other. I do NOT trust sag koochooloo at all.

Eric

by Nur-i-Azal on Sat Apr 10, 2010 07:35 PM PDT

If I recall, you have not exactly been a shining beacon of softeness yourself, either. The difference between you and I is that I am consistent in my views of Bahaism whereas since 2002 you have waffled back and forth from being a pseudo-prophet reformer of Bahaism, to a Christian fundamentalist opponent of Bahaism, then a Christian universalist, now a watered down Muwahiddin Muhammad-Ali Americanized version of a Unitarian Bahai. You have apologized repeatedly to the Bahais of the world and left the stage, only to come back later on re-invigorated taking on a new tack, as you have this time with this silly UB project of yours. To me, as clear as day, you're a political opportunist with Bahaism (or Unitarian Bahaism) being your platform of choice. I, on the other hand, have said exactly the same thing since 2002 and am not remotely interested in anything else other than to see this cult and its insidious influence permanently cut to size globally as Scientology's has. So kindly go take a hike (then a flying leap) where your  warped judgments are concerned...

Bahaism deserves attack in the same way Scientology has, and given this I have no regrets or will apologize for a single thing I have said to these dangerous and vicious cultist mofos! You, on the other hand, are simply out there to milk the discontent for your own self-aggrandizing purposes.QED

Ya NUR

Unproven hubris by BIA sag koochooloo

by Nur-i-Azal on Sat Apr 10, 2010 07:17 PM PDT

Covenant, Badi19, Sophia, NUR, Zulfiqar,
Ravian Bilani.

NUR and Zulfiqar110 have been my identities, yes, which I have never denied. Sophia, Covenant, Badi19, Ravian Bilani, and all the other identities you've accused me of being, are different people. Of course you are always welcome to prove with evidence, or by requesting the webmaster of this site to prove otherwise - as I have requested repeatedly you to do, and which to date you have not.

Note this is another well known Bahai Internet Agency tactic to repeat the same lie and hubris over and over again, ignore all requests for actual prima facie evidence (nay, ignore all evidence to the contrary), and then continue repeating the same lie and hubris over again as if no challenge or request has been made to prove the allegation. This is one facet of the collective psychosis and cognitive dissonance that characterizes the Haifan Bahai commuinty that I have pointed out to below.

Ya NUR

Can we please talk about the subject of this blog article?

by Shining Bird on Sat Apr 10, 2010 01:00 PM PDT

sag coochooloo, you are correct that Wahid Azal has a history as a very intense critic of the Baha'i Faith and Baha'is, and sometimes he attacks people in an unfair and unjustified way.

But let's all please stop debating about Mr. Azal and others like him who are hard-core opponents of Bahaism.  This is not the issue of this blog entry.  This blog entry is about a reform movement of Bahais who are more liberal than the mainline Baha'i Faith organization.  It has nothing to do with attacking the Baha'i Faith or Bahaism or Bahais of any kind, or the people making such attacks.

So can we please get back to the issue, which is the difference between liberal Bahais and conservative Bahais and how there are some Bahais trying to interpret their faith in a more liberal way, who call themselves "Unitarian Bahais"?  It might be relevant in this context to talk about the conflict between religious fundamentalists and religious liberals in general, for example.  But it is irrelevant to talk about how some people are attacking Baha'is and the Baha'i Faith.  So they are.  One of them, Mr. Azal, is posting here.  But that has nothing to do with the topic of this blog article.

-----

Unitarian Universalist Bahai Blog: //www.uubahai.com. Liberal perspectives on the Bahai faith.

Dale Husband

by sag koochooloo on Sat Apr 10, 2010 12:43 PM PDT

I think you deserve a final response from me, a final one as I do not find to and fros with bitter people enjoyable or fruitful.  I will probably open myself to a barage of attacks by responding to you, but you asked for some evidence of material that readers have found very sad to read .

Your being a Baha'i gives you no automatic crediblity here.

I am not a bahai, but I am continuously labeled as an Internet Agent by this guy. He also accuses others who are not Bahais of being one as a last resort, to justify the reason people criticize his actions is due to beinga Bahai. Then he accuses of denial. If you have not seen his behavior on this website I suggest you look up blogs and comments by Covenant, Badi19, Sophia, NUR, Zulfiqar, Ravian Bilani. There have been more IDs but I cannot remember them. These people are either multiple IDs or part of his support network here. You can see his supportive comments on these blogs for such individuals. These are some examples of his recent behavior here. So many offensive blogs and comments have been deleted.

//iranian.com/main/blog/jahanshah-javid/i-am-bahai-too

//iranian.com/main/blog/faryarm/emancipation-bah-s-also-about-emancipation-iran 

//iranian.com/main/blog/covenant/hateful-rantings-bahai-prophet

//iranian.com/main/blog/parvaneh-farid/court-without-observers-and-hardly-lawyers-only-iran 

I have also seen him posting links from TRB here where he accuses someone called Paul Hammond of being a paedophie, although this is not true. Here is an example of the obsessive behavior where Bahai Human Rights are concerned.

//www.iran-press-service.com/ips/articles-2008/may2008/a-grand-ayatollah-and-an-influencital-journalist-t.shtml

//iranian.com/main/news/2010/02/28-1

Thanks for the insults. Once again, you prove my point that Baha'is are no better or worse than most other religious fanatics in indulging in double talk and rejecting or ignoring the embarrassing facts about your own religion.

Actually, it was you who became personal with insults. You accused me of being a hypocrite and of ignorance without knowing me. I may know more about the plights of bahais than you think. And Scottish sayings have no relevance here! I do not play such childish games. Either say something of substance or get laughed at.

That’s right, I think people who are bitter and negative do not deserve to be taken seriously. There are millions of Bahais in this world who do not sit at computers and slag off Islam although they have been very poorly treated and have had members of their families murdered by IRI. While people like you insist that if something did not suit you it will automatically not suit others. You are wrong to assume I or others would behave in the same way given the same situations, when you say I would be bitter too. What stops you from moving on and just living in peace with your own religion (if you have one) and letting others do the same? Please do not shoot the messenger.

Fallacies galore!

by Dale_Husband on Fri Apr 09, 2010 05:39 PM PDT

People are fine with those who are making constructive criticisms, but there has been a lot of nasty stuff posted here about Bahais.

And who gets to define the difference between one and the other? YOU? And why should the actions of others have any bearing on me?

People using multiple IDs and just being malicious. Trying to promote their own religion by slandering Bahais and undermining their Human Rights. And then going on Bahai blogs and wishing death on Bahais.

Perhaps you would accuse Wahid Azal of these things? Sorry, I've never known him to post any death threats again. Please copy and paste the actual statements he or others opposed to the Baha'i Faith have made that include death threats. As an Honorable Skeptic, I'm not about to take your word for anything, since you are a complete stranger to me. Your being a Baha'i gives you no automatic crediblity here.

Dale Husband, either you are saying you have not seen any of those blogs or are being a hypocrite yourself. If you are bitter please do not make it other peoples problem, others do not have to suffer along with you. It is also arrogant to assume your experience is somehow superior to the experience of those who are happy or disagree with you.

Thanks for the insults. Once again, you prove my point that Baha'is are no better or worse than most other religious fanatics in indulging in double talk and rejecting or ignoring the embarrassing facts about your own religion.

And Scottish sayings have no relevance here! I do not play such childish games. Either say something of substance or get laughed at.

Husband

by sag koochooloo on Fri Apr 09, 2010 02:03 PM PDT

 "if you dare, stop being hypocritical and actually try to learn something! "

To which I say "Yer bum's oot the windae" - You're talking rubbish in Scottish.

Constructive criticism versus malicious propoganda

by Gavazn on Fri Apr 09, 2010 01:36 PM PDT

People are fine with those who are making constructive criticisms, but there has been a lot of nasty stuff posted here about Bahais. People using multiple IDs and just being malicious. Trying to promote their own religion by slandering Bahais and undermining their Human Rights. And then going on Bahai blogs and wishing death on Bahais.

Dale Husband, either you are saying you have not seen any of those blogs or are being a hypocrite yourself. If you are bitter please do not make it other peoples problem, others do not have to suffer along with you. It is also arrogant to assume your experience is somehow superior to the experience of those who are happy or disagree with you.  

fundamentalist Bahais, liberal Bahais, and anti-Bahais

by Shining Bird on Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:46 PM PDT

Liberal or Unitarian Universalist Bahais are not part of any systematic campaign to criticize the Haifa-based Baha'i Faith, as sag coochooloo seems to be claiming.  They disagree with some aspects of it, sure.  They express their disagreement, like anyone of conviction would.

There are three sides of a debate going on -- fundamentalist Bahais, liberal/reformist/unitarian Bahais, and anti-Bahais -- and all three sides have their own viewpoints and goals.

One thing is clear: The fundamentalist Bahais (strong supporters of the Haifa-based Baha'i Faith organization) don't want any alternative views about Bahaism to be expressed or considered, whether by people who disagree with and oppose the Bahai religion in general or whether by liberal Bahais who don't support the Haifan interpretation of the religion.

The irony is that the same fundamentalist Bahais who argue that people in Iran should be free to be Bahai, would probably treat the liberal Bahais and opponents of Bahaism in an unjust way, just as Bahais are being treated by the Iranian mullahcracy, if ever (God forbid) the fundamentalist Bahai leaders were to gain political power over a country.  Fundamentalist Haifan Bahais believe that their supreme leadership institution ("Universal House of Justice") should someday become a theocracy ruling the governments of the world, and they also believe in shunning Bahai heretics and regard them with contempt.  Fortunately, they will never gain the political power they desire.  The world has had enough of arrogant religious leaders holding the reins of government and discriminating against people with whom they disagree with about matters of faith.

-----

Unitarian Universalist Bahai Blog: //www.uubahai.com. Liberal perspectives on the Bahai faith.

smear campaigns

by Shining Bird on Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:32 PM PDT

Dale wrote: "I could just as easily say that there was a smear campaign against Mirza Muhammad Ali (half-brother of Abdu'l-Baha) to justify the breaking of Baha'u'llah's original covenant by making Shoghi Effendi the immediate successor of Abdu'l-Baha."

Indeed there was such a smear campaign, and still is, and it's a vicious one.  I have actually studied the primary source material on both sides and came to the conclusion that Mirza Muhammad Ali's side of the dispute between the brothers was closer to correct and that he and his family and supporters were treated unjustly.  An article that helps to set the record straight is available at //www.uubahai.com/2010/03/ghusn-i-akbar-part-1-the-facts/

-----

Unitarian Universalist Bahai Blog: //www.uubahai.com. Liberal perspectives on the Bahai faith.

sag koochooloo

by Dale_Husband on Thu Apr 08, 2010 06:45 PM PDT

Also like to add bigotry leads to fascism, demonstrated by the IRI and the views of some clearly displayed on this website, with an organised Smear Campaign against bahais. We have seen their behaviour, so God help us if those sorts of people sweet talk the naive and use the Green Movement for their own agendas.

Please define specifically and clearly this "Smear Campaign". I could just as easily say that there was a smear campaign against Mirza Muhammad Ali (half-brother of Abdu'l-Baha) to justify the breaking of Baha'u'llah's original covenant by making Shoghi Effendi the immediate successor of Abdu'l-Baha. Are you aware that nearly all of the descendants of Baha'u'llah rejected that move and were labled covenant breakers? That's not a smear campaign, that is something openly declared in Baha'i propaganda! Specifically, the ludicrous, planet sized pile of dogmatic talking points known as The Covenant of Baha'u'llah by Adib Taherzadeh! I only regret that when I first read it, I was so brainwashed by Baha'i "deepenings" that I didn't throw the book away in disgust and resign from the Faith immediatly! Instead, it took a few years for the logical failings of that book to sink in and wake me up! But once the skeptical part of me FINALLY kicked in after it had been buried for so long, I was set free and reclaimed my true self. And yes, I am bitter about my past experience with the Haifa Baha'i Faith. You would be too, if you felt violated!

Now, if you dare, stop being hypocritical and actually try to learn something!

Denial is not a River in Egypt

by Nur-i-Azal on Thu Apr 08, 2010 03:19 PM PDT

No lie has ever been uttered by me regarding the corruptions, fascism and abuses of the Haifan Bahai organization. You are welcome to prove otherwise with facts, if you have any, like I have provided. As such everything ever stated by me has been fact. You Haifan Bahais have a problem with the concept of truth, let alone fact, because most of you live in a perpetual psychological cocoon of cognitive dissonance -- not to mention that I believe the majority of you are bona fide clinical psychotic cases. This is so, because most of you when it comes to  issues surrounding your cult throw all reason and caution to the four winds and display nothing but complete delusion, brutal nastiness, not to mention danger to anyone around you other than your own herd, because your mentalities are similar to other warped cultists such as the Scientologists, for example. But this has been the consistent pattern and narrative since 1866-67 with you people...

Now get off your BIA high horse and address these facts in the blog linked item by item. Denying such facts never makes them go away, whether you like it or not.

 

Ya NUR

Yeah, a billion times

by sag koochooloo on Thu Apr 08, 2010 03:10 PM PDT

No use Mate. When you started the lies you lost. And they are all there for fair minded people to see. And thanks for the lecture, but I'll reserve judgement on who I turn to for moral guidance.

Can you say Paranoia? Egomania?

Yes

by Nur-i-Azal on Thu Apr 08, 2010 03:05 PM PDT

Here you go, again, for the millionth time:

 //bahaicultfaq.blogspot.com/

And thanks for proving the vigilance and ever-watchful eye part since you posted a reply to my message within less than 20 minutes after it went up. Can you say BAHAI INTERNET AGENCY, naneh man ghareebam jaan-e-'azeez?

I support human righs without discrimination -- and especially in cases where Bahais are instrumental in trying to remove it, like in Uganda. I also believe the Bahais should not be given preferential treatment over other minorities whose plight has been generally trivialized,  which is what the Bahai HR circus has done. But, that said, on several occasions now the Haifan Bahai organization has violated human and civil rights itself, including mine. And speaking of bigots and not believing in an important aspect of human rights,

"We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that
our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In
the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role
in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal
convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is
supreme is equivalent to "taking partners with God" which is abhorrent
to the Teachings of the Faith."

//www.bahai-library.org/talks/martin.watson.html

 

 

 

Ya NUR

And after your kind of behaviour who can blame them?

by sag koochooloo on Thu Apr 08, 2010 02:50 PM PDT

"remain ever vigilant, monitoring the actions of those who, driven by the promptings of ego, seek to sow the seeds of doubt in the minds of the friends and undermine the Faith."

Do you want evidence of the lies you have been writing on the internet about Bahais? You have tried at every opportunity to slander them and undermine their Human Rights. Are they not allowed to defend against lies and malicious propoganda spread by individuals such as yourself?

You have shown to be a bigot supporting violations of human rights gainst Baha'is. You have wished death upon them and even ethnic cleansing. A dissident of any ideology or school of thought will NOT support the human rights violation against the followers of any faith, because this is the real reason for dissident's own cause-- i.e. respecting human rights. 

Good luck to them I say. It is the right of individuals and Groups to maintain standards of decency and to defend themselves against vicious propoganda.

God help us from this....

by Nur-i-Azal on Thu Apr 08, 2010 02:10 PM PDT

//bahai-library.com/published.uhj/counsellors.html
THE INSTITUTION OF THE COUNSELLORS
A Document Prepared by the Universal House
of Justice
January 29 2001

Quote

Protection of the Cause (pp. 15-16)

Although deepening the friends' understanding of the Covenant
and increasing their love and loyalty to it are of paramount importance,
the duties of the Auxiliary Board members for Protection do not end
here. The Board members must remain ever vigilant, monitoring the
actions of those who, driven by the promptings of ego, seek to sow the
seeds of doubt in the minds of the friends and undermine the Faith. In
general, whenever believers become aware of such problems, they should immediately
contact whatever institution they feel moved to turn to, whether it be a
Counsellor, an Auxiliary Board member, the National Spiritual Assembly
or their own Local Assembly. It then becomes the duty of that
institution to ensure that the report is fed into the correct channels
and that all the other institutions affected are promptly informed. Not
infrequently, the responsibility will fall on an Auxiliary Board member,
in coordination with the Assembly concerned, to take some form of
action in response to the situation. This involvement will include
counselling the believer in question; warning him, if necessary, of the
consequences of his actions;
and bringing to the attention of the Counsellors the gravity of the
situation, which may call for their intervention. Naturally, the Board
member has to exert every effort to counteract the schemes and arrest
the spread of the influence of those few who, despite attempts to guide
them, eventually break the Covenant. The need to protect the Faith from the
attacks of its enemies may not be generally appreciated by the friends,
particularly in places where attacks have been infrequent. However, it
is certain that such opposition will increase, become concerted, and
eventually universal. The writings clearly foreshadow not only an
intensification of the machinations of internal enemies, but a rise in
the hostility and opposition of its external enemies, whether religious
or secular, as the Cause pursues its onward march towards ultimate
victory. Therefore, in the light of the warnings of the Guardian, the
Auxiliary Boards for Protection should keep "constantly" a "watchful
eye" on those "who are known to be enemies, or to have been put out of
the Faith", discreetly investigate their activities, alert intelligently
the friends to the opposition inevitably to come, explain how each
crisis in God's Faith has always proved to be a blessing in disguise,
and prepare them for the "dire contest which is destined to range the
Army of Light against the forces of darkness".

COP

by sag koochooloo on Thu Apr 08, 2010 10:43 AM PDT

I agree: "What leads to fascism is religion and the urge to convert everyone to ones preferred religion - be it whatever. "

Also like to add bigotry leads to fascism, demonstrated by the IRI and the views of some clearly displayed on this website, with an o rganised Smear Campaign against bahais. We have seen their behaviour, so God help us if those sorts of people sweet talk the naive and use the Green Movement for their own agendas.  

CoP

by Nur-i-Azal on Wed Apr 07, 2010 09:25 PM PDT

Nagoftam? 

 

Ya NUR

Maneck

by Nur-i-Azal on Wed Apr 07, 2010 09:27 PM PDT

You yourself admit you are an agnostic.  What business is it of yours to
try and remake the Baha'i Faith?

This is a very interesting tack given that Husayn 'Ali Nuri was rightfully accused by multiple individuals of a similar point of departure vis-a-vis the the religion of the Bayan. Shall I quote what Mulla Jaf'ar Niraqi has to say or Agha Khan Kirmani?

MasoudA, ditto, baradar! You nailed it in one. The political presence of Bahaism (not Babism or the Bayan) has been an unmitigated disaster for Iran in every major era, during the Constitutional Revolution and its aftermath, during the Pahlavi era and under the Eshalic fascist theocracy. This is why no preferential treatment or exclusive entitlements should be extended to any religious minority community per se after the IR is gone, something the Haifan Bahais are actually after for themselves. Yes, Iran needs nationalism, but nationalism does not necessarily lead to fascism, unless Frau Maneck likes to suggest that the patriotism qua nationalism of the American body politic is fascist -- which is fine with me if she admits this.

Now besides the common theories of nationalism we are used to, there are also notions of autochthonous nationalism which is the form of nationalism most Iranians subscribe to since ancient times. The Mazdaean notion of Iran as Eran-Vej/Aryana Vaeja,  i.e. the soil and land of Iran as reflection of the Celestial Earth, is authochthonous. Fascism by virtue of several of its distinct characteristic does not fully subscribe to autochthony. Given this, Iranian Nationalism cannot lead to fascism, although Bahais (who are characteristically fascist in other areas themselves) don't like to admit this since their internationalist globalism likes to dilute and sanitize all cultures  in their own right  instead for a mish-mash koombaya sort of watered down culture without soul.

Ya NUR

Response to Susan Maneck

by Dale_Husband on Wed Apr 07, 2010 05:12 PM PDT

You yourself admit you are an agnostic.  What business is it of yours to try and remake the Baha'i Faith?

 I am agnostic and not atheist because I recognize that the true nature of God, whatever it may be, is so beyond our understanding that from a limited human perspective it is unknowable and cannot be defined by any religion. Most atheists take at face value the limited images of God depicted in most religions and reject God because of that. I do not. BTW, one of the first Baha'i books I read was J. E. Esselmont's Baha'u'llah and the New Era, which said that God is unknowable and thus one may view God agnostically. And as for my desire to reform the Baha'i Faith, it is to see justice done and put dogmatic extremists like you out of business. Your kind ruined  Christianity, you ruined Islam, and now you have ruined the Baha'i Faith. ENOUGH!!!! Reform ALL those great religions and the world will be healthier!

 Yes, the Baha'i Faith has gone through a period of stagnation, but that ended last year and since then there has been substantial growth.

Only since LAST YEAR?! Excuse me while I cast doubt on your word. Short term events have little bearing on long term trends. Case in point, the Mormons claim over 10 million members and dominate the state of Utah, while the Baha'i Faith claims fewer people and does not dominate any place, remaining a scattered minority with almost NO potential to make a real difference anywhere. Since the Mormon Church is about as old as the Baha'i Faith, that indicates they are far more successful than the Baha'is.

 As for Masoud's argument that the Baha'i Faith was 'devised' to weaken nationalistic sentiments, the Baha'i Faith is older than any Iranian nationalism.

Total falsehood. Ever heard of the Medo-Persian Empire that ruled most of the Middle East for centuries? Its greatest king was Cyrus, whose conquest of Babylon enabled the Hebrews to return from exile to restore their nation which the Babylonians has conquered and scattered. Now, unless you can prove that the Baha'i Faith was founded before the 5th Century BC.....

 If nationalist sentiments have been weak in Iran, it is Islam which weakened them, not the Baha'i Faith. Baha'is don't make up enough of the population in Iran to make a difference on that score.  But I don't think that is at the core of Iran's problems anyhow. Iran needs to stop looking for conspiracies to blame and start taking some responsibility for its own choices. Nationalism leads to fascism and that will not help Iran.

Another lie of yours. Islam enhanced Arab nationalism, allowing for them to build up a great empire for the first time. Later, the Turks also built themselves a mighty empire centered around Islam. And what do you think the Islamic Revolution of 1979 in Iran was about? NATIONALISM EMPOWERED BY ISLAM!

Plus, a healthy, moderate form of nationalism can lead to great things, like a people being determined to control their own destiny and reject tyranny. That's what the American Revolution was about.

"Dinnae teach yer Granny tae suck eggs"

by sag koochooloo on Wed Apr 07, 2010 10:48 AM PDT

A fine old Scottish saying in response to :

"Do not be decieved by the lies told about us by Haifan Baha’is that we are trying to destroy the Baha'i Faith. We are trying to reform it. "

smaneck, what the...?

by Cost-of-Progress on Wed Apr 07, 2010 09:19 AM PDT

"Nationalism leads to fascism and that will not help Iran" 

Absolutely NOT! Nationalism only means one puts religion AFTER country, if at all. much like what you may see elsewhere in the world. They are very religious (at least in the States), but there's only one country and one loyalty. They put America first

What leads to fascism is religion and the urge to convert everyone to ones preferred religion - be it whatever. This is a fact.

___________

IRAN FIRST

____________

S. Maneck doesn't seem to know the facts

by Shining Bird on Wed Apr 07, 2010 08:54 AM PDT

First of all, Dale is not "recreating" the Bahai faith.  He simply posted his personal opinion on his blog, that he thinks a Unitarian version of the Bahai faith would be a good idea.  He happens to be a Unitarian Universalist and a former Baha'i Faith member who remains interested in Bahaism.

Secondly, the person who posted this blog on Iranian.com is not Dale.  Perhaps you should ask Jamil Eghrari why he re-posted Dale's article and why he supports the Unitarian Bahai movement.

Third, the Unitarian Bahai movement is not emerging in the image of Dale.  Dale has commented a few times on the emergence of this movement, but he is not one of the founders of the movement.  As for whose image it's being created in, I think the Unitarian Bahais would say that it's an attempt to go back to the simple message of Bahaullah rather than focusing on the claims of his successors and Haifan Baha'i Faith administrative institutions.

-----

Unitarian Universalist Bahai Blog: //www.uubahai.com. Liberal perspectives on the Bahai faith.

Should an agnostic be recreating a religion in his own image?

by smaneck on Wed Apr 07, 2010 07:11 AM PDT

Dale and Massoud, 

You yourself admit you are an agnostic.  What business is it of yours to try and remake the Baha'i Faith? Yes, the Baha'i Faith has gone through a period of stagnation, but that ended last year and since then there has been substantial growth. As for Masoud's argument that the Baha'i Faith was 'devised' to weaken nationalistic sentiments, the Baha'i Faith is older than any Iranian nationalism. If nationalist sentiments have been weak in Iran, it is Islam which weakened them, not the Baha'i Faith. Baha'is don't make up enough of the population in Iran to make a difference on that score.  But I don't think that is at the core of Iran's problems anyhow. Iran needs to stop looking for conspiracies to blame and start taking some responsibility for its own choices. Nationalism leads to fascism and that will not help Iran.