The Bab

[Mick]

Wait, I know the answer. Ask me...Ask me. Is it Postmastrianism?

[Postmaster]

Well I can't undertstand the sarcasum. But no it's a major world faith. Anyway I'm not a megalomaniac, I'm flawed, I don't know it all. Unlike most Baha'is that seem to think they have the answer to every aspect of religion, life and philosophy. I just say whats on my mind, throw ideas out and i'm not worried what people think or if i'm wrong.

[bupanishad2007]

My past experience with Bahais is such that I found them to be generally very paranoid about too many questions about their Faith. For instance, about letting anyone see the picture of Baha'ullah unless they went to Acre, Israel (I have seen his picture on the Net, and there seems to be nothing worth "hiding"). And they locked my family out of "Deepening" sessions because they did not follow me into the Faith. Finally, I dropped out since I could not see how 100+ more books and new laws by Baha'ullah were any more helpful than the simple teachings of Jesus, for instance. Am I just plain wrong, or did I misunderstand the Teachings?

[arthra]

Postmaster wrote:

"Unlike most Baha'is that seem to think they have the answer to every aspect of religion, life and philosophy. I just say whats on my mind, throw ideas out and i'm not worried what people think or if i'm wrong."

I really doubt Postmaster that any sarcasm was intended...

Above you wrote in your post:

"Religious scholars can and have spotted more damaging problems in all monotheist religions and as I have said before Baha'i faith would be more vulnerable.."

My comment:

The "damaging problems" pointed out by some "religious scholars" (and here I do not include all of them) is more often I believe in themselves, that they can begin with a negative bias or believe they're trying to be objective when in reality their perspective is deeply flawed. Scholars as you know differ on a lot of subjects including religious subjects.

Baha'is are supposed to humble in their approach and respect other religions... and I think we generally are as we accept the Founders of the great religions.

I was just wondering my friend if you've been able lately to read more of the Baha'i Writings?

- Art

[arthra]

Originally Posted by bupanishad2007

My past experience with Bahais is such that I found them to be generally very paranoid about too many questions about their Faith. For instance, about letting anyone see the picture of Baha'ullah unless they went to Acre, Israel (I have seen his picture on the Net, and there seems to be nothing worth "hiding"). And they locked my family out of "Deepening" sessions because they did not follow me into the Faith. Finally, I dropped out since I could not see how 100+ more books and new laws by Baha'ullah were any more helpful than the simple teachings of Jesus, for instance. Am I just plain wrong, or did I misunderstand the Teachings?

Thanks for your comment "bupanishad"!

And welcome to the Baha'i Forum here at CR!

Yes I think you may have gotten an incorrect impression regarding the "picture of Baha'u'llah". It is hardly because of "paranoia" that it is not used publically...by the way... the one that is copied most often on the web is not the same as the one in the archives building in Haifa. The one used on the web is from a book by a Seventh Day Adventist missionary to Iran who disliked our Faith...

Anyway it is out of reverence that we do not used the image of Baha'u'llah and for that matter using the image of any Manifestation of God such as Jesus, Muhammad, Moses is in our view being irreverant and disrespectful.

There are also people who are tempted to worship these images and for that reason we do not encourage the public use of them or adoration of images.

I'm unsure what you refer to when you wrote:

"And they locked my family out of "Deepening" sessions because they did not follow me into the Faith. "

Most deepening sessions today use the Ruhi books and no one is excluded from them... so I'm unsure what you are referring to... The nineteen day Feast is for Baha'is only.

Your comment:

"...I dropped out since I could not see how 100+ more books and new laws by Baha'ullah were any more helpful than the simple teachings of Jesus.."

As you know we Baha'is allow anyone to decide for themselves what is best for them spiritually so your choice is yours. I think if you examine however many of the teachings you find they are very friendly to the "simple teachings of Jesus" and are compatible.

God's blessings on you in your path!

- Art

[bupanishad2007]

I do not hate Bahais, and I certainly do not mean to misrepesent them. I am speaking of personal experience, but that can be misleading, too, depending on the type of Bahai people one meets (just as in other religions). I know I was soundly reprimanded for taking my wife and then-3-year-old daughter to a "Deepening" session. That was some time ago (about 30 years), so things may be different now. I get great spiritual comfort from the Bahai writings, personally, and love how Baha'ullah speaks of how the "breeze from Heaven" swept over him and taught him spiritual things. I feel that "breeze" sometimes myself . . .

[Popeyesays]

Manichaeanism? Some ascribe it to Zoroastrianism, but truly it's from Mani (210-276 C.E.) about two centuries after Christ. The religion of Mani is a pretty good example of a failed religion.

Neither Islam nor Baha`i allow any dualism.

Regards,
Scott

[arthra]

Originally Posted by bupanishad2007

I do not hate Bahais, and I certainly do not mean to misrepesent them. I am speaking of personal experience, but that can be misleading, too, depending on the type of Bahai people one meets (just as in other religions). I know I was soundly reprimanded for taking my wife and then-3-year-old daughter to a "Deepening" session. That was some time ago (about 30 years), so things may be different now. I get great spiritual comfort from the Bahai writings, personally, and love how Baha'ullah speaks of how the "breeze from Heaven" swept over him and taught him spiritual things. I feel that "breeze" sometimes myself . . .

Well thanks for your post again bupanishad!

Like i mentioned above... Ruhi classes are the main deepening classes that are offered today.. and as I wrote I have no idea why anyone would exclude your family from a deepening session!?

Baha'i Feast is exclusive for Baha'is only but even in a case where someone happens to be there through some reason we wouldn't eject them or be rude to them.

I very happy that you derived some "spiritual comfort" from the Baha'i Writings!

You may have heard that "Summons of the Lord of Hosts" was made available a few years ago and is newly translated Tablets to the Kings and Rulers... Here is a brief excerpt with a theme I think you'll recognize:

"Beware lest ye hinder the breeze of God from blowing over your hearts, the breeze through which the hearts of such as have turned unto Him can be quickened. Hearken unto the clear admonitions that We have revealed for you in this Tablet, that God, in turn, may hearken unto you, and may open before your faces the portals of His mercy. He, verily, is the Compassionate, the Merciful."

Allah'u'Abha!

- Art

[arthra]

Above I wrote a few posts ago:

"... the one that is copied most often on the web is not the same as the one in the archives building in Haifa. The one used on the web is from a book by a Seventh Day Adventist missionary to Iran who disliked our Faith..."

My apologies...it was a Presbyterian missionary not a Seventh Day Adventist missionary as I wrote above... My apologies to my Adventist friends.

- Art

[Postmaster]

Neither Islam nor Baha`i allow any dualism.

I'm not talking about an exact retake of the religion. I'm talking about certain ideas that seems to have influenced both as was explained on a site i read once. Lost the link though. And if it was before them religions then partial truths must have exsisted in Manichaeanism yet it still failed. I'd say the dualism is to blame.

[Popeyesays]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

I'm not talking about an exact retake of the religion. I'm talking about certain ideas that seems to have influenced both as was explained on a site i read once. Lost the link though. And if it was before them religions then partial truths must have exsisted in Manichaeanism yet it still failed. I'd say the dualism is to blame.

I'm curious as to what evidence of 'dualism' you see in Islam or Baha`i belief? Personally I don't see it, but you may be seeing something I am missing. You know . . . forest and trees . . . and that sort of thing.

Regards,
Scott

[Postmaster]

Well I've made a post about Manichaeanism and the Baha'i faith and I think the argument as to if Manichaeanism influenced the Baha'i faith is obviously a yes. Why don't you make an effort to do a little research on Manichaeanism.

Mani said all religions were different due to the needs of the people but fundamentally they were all the same in nature. And that he was next in a line of prophets to reveal the truth. etc etc.. This guy was of Persian Royalty descent so was Bahá'u'lláh? But not saying he was of the same blood line. Guess that part is a coincidence.

[Popeyesays]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

Well I've made a post about Manichaeanism and the Baha'i faith and I think the argument as to if Manichaeanism influenced the Baha'i faith is obviously a yes. Why don't you make an effort to do a little research on Manichaeanism.

Mani said all religions were different due to the needs of the people but fundamentally they were all the same in nature. And that he was next in a line of prophets to reveal the truth. etc etc.. This guy was of Persian Royalty descent so was Bahá'u'lláh? But not saying he was of the same blood line. Guess that part is a coincidence.

Well the first time I researched Mani was the mid-80's but that required interlibrary loan and several months of waiting, the net has helped that a lot.

But what I was wondering is about dualism, as expressed in Mani's belief system and an utter lack of dualism in Islam and the Baha`i Faith. A central belief of Mani's writing is that God and Satan are duelists involved in what appears to be a contest of equals. The Baha`i Faith ignores Satan as an external entity entirely.

This is well-supported in the Baha`i writings:
1) "You have asked why it was necessary for the soul that was from God to make this journey back to God. Would you like to understand the reality of this question just as I teach it or do you wish to hear it as the world teaches it? -- for if I should answer you according to the latter way, this would be but imitation and would not make the subject clear.
The reality underlying this question is that the evil spirit, Satan or whatever is interpreted as evil, refers to the lower nature in man. This baser nature is symbolized in various ways. In man there are two expressions, one is the expression of nature, the other the expression of the spiritual realm. The world of nature is defective. Look at it clearly, casting aside all superstition and imagination. If you should leave a man uneducated and barbarous in the wilds of Africa, would there be any doubt about his remaining ignorant? God has never created an evil spirit; all such ideas and nomenclature are symbols expressing the mere human or earthly nature of man. It is an essential condition of the soil of earth that thorns, weeds and fruitless trees may grow from it. Relatively speaking, this is evil; it is simply the lower state and baser product of nature."
(Abdu'l-Baha, Foundations of World Unity, p. 77)
2)"Observe, how those in whose midst the Satan of self had for years sown the seeds of malice and hate became so fused and blended through their allegiance to this wondrous and transcendent Revelation that it seemed as if they had sprung from the same loins."
(Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Iqan, p. 112)
3) "God is clement and kind to all the branches, leaves and fruit of this tree and there is no existence or interference of a satanic tree whatever, -- Satan being a creation of human proclivities. God alone is the Creator and all are creatures of His might. Therefore we must love all mankind as His creatures and realize that all are growing upon the Tree of His mercy -- that all are servants of His almighty Will and manifestations of His good pleasure."
(Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 348)
4) "There are two sides to man. One is divine, the other worldly; one is luminous, the other dark; one is angelic, the other diabolic. In all sensuous conditions man is equal to the animals, for all animal characteristics exist in him. Likewise, divine and satanic qualities are contained in man; knowledge and ignorance; guidance and error; truth and falsehood; generosity and avarice; valor and timidity; inclination towards God and tendency towards Satan. Chastity and purity, corruption and vileness, economy and avidity, good and evil -- all are contained in man."
(Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 406)

Mani's concept of a seperate God-like entity "Satan" has no room in the Baha`i Faith at all.

Regards,
Scott

[Postmaster]

So because of the dualism in Manichaeanism you are saying that the other aspects of that religion didn't influence the Baha'i faith? They clearly clearly did. He was the world’s first global prophet Manichaeanism as established from Western Europe to Far East Asia. All religions were equal in Mani's eyes. There was one universal religion in which they all fit in. But he was a heretic to the Zoroastrians and early Christians. He too claimed visitation from an Angel, I'm not sure if he was claiming to be the return of Christ but he considered himself as another apostle of Christ.

[arthra]

Hello my good friend Postmaster!

Above you wrote:

"So because of the dualism in Manichaeanism you are saying that the other aspects of that religion didn't influence the Baha'i faith? They clearly clearly did."
and earlier you wrote above:

"I think the argument as to if Manichaeanism influenced the Baha'i faith is obviously a yes."

Here Postmaster I do have a problem with your thinking on a causative connection between Manichaeism influencing Baha'i Faith...

Manichaeism is a long "dead" religion. It's scriptures were pretty much destroyed... It lingered awhile in central asia and was lost in history after ghengis khan ...that's what I recall about it. It didn't survive into the modern era. Did it influence Christianity?... I think that's a "possible" if you consider that Saint Augustine was a Manicheaen and some of the ideas about evil and dualism in Christianity may be so... but clearly it was gone as a movement in modern times.

Also what was Manichaeanism in Saint Augustine's time was probably different from what it became centuries later..

Baha'i Faith or rather it's Babi antecedents arose from a movement known as Shaykhism in the nineteenth century and another factor was the expectation of the Mahdi and Return of the Twelfth Imam in Shiah Islam so these were the influences of the time and a lot of material has been written about it and discussed here on this forum. I believe Manichaeism was not a viable force after the the time of the Mongols.

I would agree that Manichaeism made an early attempt to be a universal religion but apparently failed...just because Mani was Persian or because his ideas as believed by some may have some similarities with Baha'i principles doesn't show "influence".

You have to have some sort of connection here and show us how Manichaeism influenced Baha'i Faith! I think there is a better arguement that Manichaeism influenced Christianity because historically it was around as Christainity developed, but that isn't a point I would push with Christians.

Thanks for your post!

- Art