Bahaullah: Gawhar Khanum

[CG Didymus]

Muhammad said it in the Quran.

'There is no compulsion in Religion.' As such one respects the right for people to choose their own path, it is a God given right.

What can be mutually shared is virtues that enable us to exist together harmoniously.

Regards Tony

So Baha'is are perfectly fine with other religions having beliefs that the Baha'i Faith says are wrong? But, I thought of another question for you that relates more to this OP also. The way Baha'is have presented Progressive Revelation is that the new message is needed for the advancement of civilization. The old religions and their old laws have been replaced with better, more up to date information from God. So, up to the coming of the Baha'i Faith, Islam was the most current message from God, do Baha'is believe all people of all the other religions should have recognized Muhammad and followed his teachings? If "yes", then, even if their old religion believed in monogamy, those "pure hearted ones" that recognized the truth of Muhammad's message, should have taken multiple wives?

 

[CG Didymus]

All the religions have truth that is relevant for today. All religions have teachings that we can all learn from.

Clearly if Baha'u'llah is the Manifestation of God for this day, then an essential part of what is needed resides within Baha'u'llah's Teachings. That does not negate the necessity of the other great faiths. We all need each other and have something to learn from one another. Its more about learning to walk together, than the Baha'is claiming the crown of being the next greatest and latest religion with exclusive claims to truth.

It's just that Baha'is negate major beliefs and doctrines of most of the other religions. And, with Islam, Baha'is say that their leaders are the beasts and evil dragons from the Book of Revelation. So it is kind of saying two opposing views about those other religions at the same time. And, some Baha'is have said that the other religions have had their time and are now, essentially, irrelevant. Is that just their view or did they get that from the Baha'i teachings? And, you know me, I always bring up the point that if the Baha'is are correct, then Christians, with their belief that Jesus rose from the dead, have been wrong from the beginning. But now with multiple wives, were Christians wrong about that too? Or did God go from one wife in Christianity to multiple wives in Islam, and then back to one wife with Baha'u'llah?

 

[Dawnofhope]

It's just that Baha'is negate major beliefs and doctrines of most of the other religions.

I prefer to focus on how Baha'is affim the core beliefs of major religions, particularly with regards to living a good life and having excellent character. The Baha'i Faith of course does negate some beliefs. That is no new thing. Christianity made changes to Judaism and Islam corrected both Christianity and Judaism. It makes sense that with the passing of time, original Teachings become lost or misunderstood and the New Messenger corrects those misunderstandings. If the religions of today could achieve God's purpose, then there would be no need for the Baha'i Faith.

And, with Islam, Baha'is say that their leaders are the beasts and evil dragons from the Book of Revelation.

The beasts and dragons in the book of revelation are not 'evil'. They simply symbolise two historic empires as the various beasts in the book of Daniel symbolised the Babylonians, Persians, Greeks and Romans.

So it is kind of saying two opposing views about those other religions at the same time.

And, some Baha'is have said that the other religions have had their time and are now, essentially, irrelevant. Is that just their view or did they get that from the Baha'i teachings?

All the main religions are clearly very relevant to not just those who practice them but the countries in which they are practiced.

And, you know me, I always bring up the point that if the Baha'is are correct, then Christians, with their belief that Jesus rose from the dead, have been wrong from the beginning.

The Christian belief in the physical resurrection of Christ was extremely useful and important, and remains so. However it also contributes to a narrative about the exclusivity of Christ's Message above all other religions. For that reason alone it needs to be questioned.

But now with multiple wives, were Christians wrong about that too? Or did God go from one wife in Christianity to multiple wives in Islam, and then back to one wife with Baha'u'llah?

Jesus never taught monogamy.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

It's just that Baha'is negate major beliefs and doctrines of most of the other religions. And, with Islam, Baha'is say that their leaders are the beasts and evil dragons from the Book of Revelation. So it is kind of saying two opposing views about those other religions at the same time. And, some Baha'is have said that the other religions have had their time and are now, essentially, irrelevant. Is that just their view or did they get that from the Baha'i teachings? And, you know me, I always bring up the point that if the Baha'is are correct, then Christians, with their belief that Jesus rose from the dead, have been wrong from the beginning. But now with multiple wives, were Christians wrong about that too? Or did God go from one wife in Christianity to multiple wives in Islam, and then back to one wife with Baha'u'llah?

Have a watch of this video for a while, is interesting. I see much of what he offers is in the writings of Baha'u'llah, though I see that in trying to explain what he experienced, he has started drawing on understandings drawn from life and past religions. (It is long and so far I have watched about on hour and a half.)

It may help to give a different vision as to the Oneness that is offered by Baha'u'llah.

@adrian009 - Have you seen this one?

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

Jesus never taught monogamy.

This is from a Christian site:

"By New Testament times, monogamy was the norm in Jewish culture. Jesus taught monogamy. When Jesus was asked about divorce, His answer strongly implied that marriage is between one man and one woman, with no hint of polygamy: “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate” (Mark 10:6–18). When Jesus says that the “two shall become one flesh,” the obvious implication is that this union is between two individuals only. It’s not three or more that become one; only two become one. Nowhere does Jesus or any of the New Testament writers suggest this union should occur between a married individual and anyone else.

In fact, when Paul gives explicit commands about marriage, he references the passage about being “one flesh” and compares it to Christ and His bride, the church (Ephesians 5:32). He concludes by instructing a husband to love his wife as he loves himself (verse 33). He does not tell a husband to “love all your wives.” The word wife is singular. It is a stretch to try to apply the command about being “one flesh” to a man and several women."​

Do you think Jesus taught polygamy?

 

[CG Didymus]

The beasts and dragons in the book of revelation are not 'evil'.

But I thought you said that the beasts and the dragons from Revelation were the Umayyads and the Abbasids? And that they were evil. They sure sound evil in Revelation. So the Umayyads and Abbasids were not evil?

 

[Dawnofhope]

This is from a Christian site:

"By New Testament times, monogamy was the norm in Jewish culture. Jesus taught monogamy. When Jesus was asked about divorce, His answer strongly implied that marriage is between one man and one woman, with no hint of polygamy: “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate” (Mark 10:6–18). When Jesus says that the “two shall become one flesh,” the obvious implication is that this union is between two individuals only. It’s not three or more that become one; only two become one. Nowhere does Jesus or any of the New Testament writers suggest this union should occur between a married individual and anyone else.

In fact, when Paul gives explicit commands about marriage, he references the passage about being “one flesh” and compares it to Christ and His bride, the church (Ephesians 5:32). He concludes by instructing a husband to love his wife as he loves himself (verse 33). He does not tell a husband to “love all your wives.” The word wife is singular. It is a stretch to try to apply the command about being “one flesh” to a man and several women."​

Do you think Jesus taught polygamy?

Jesus taught neither monogamy, nor polygamy.

Polygamy had been an undeniable established norm amongst many of the Jewish prophets and it was still being practiced by many Jews when Christ came along.

Jewish polygamy clashed with Roman monogamy at the time of the early church:

"When the Christian Church came into being, polygamy was still practiced by the Jews. It is true that we find no references to it in the New Testament; and from this some have inferred that it must have fallen into disuse, and that at the time of our Lord the Jewish people had become monogamous. But the conclusion appears to be unwarranted. Josephus in two places speaks of polygamy as a recognized institution: and Justin Martyr makes it a matter of reproach to Trypho that the Jewish teachers permitted a man to have several wives. Indeed when in 212 A.D. the lex Antoniana de civitate gave the rights of Roman Citizenship to great numbers of Jews, it was found necessary to tolerate polygamy among them, even though it was against Roman law for a citizen to have more than one wife. In 285 A.D. a constitution of Diocletian and Maximian interdicted polygamy to all subjects of the empire without exception. But with the Jews, at least, the enactment failed of its effect; and in 393 A.D. a special law was issued by Theodosius to compel the Jews to relinquish this national custom. Even so they were not induced to conform."

Polygamy in Christianity - Wikipedia

 

[Dawnofhope]

But I thought you said that the beasts and the dragons from Revelation were the Umayyads and the Abbasids? And that they were evil. They sure sound evil in Revelation. So the Umayyads and Abbasids were not evil?

The Umayyads and Abbasids like many Empires were totalitarian and brutal. However the Abbasids in particular made provision for the advancement of knowledge and skills that led to the development of the Islamic Golden Age. The Umayyads were most distinguished for their corruption of theology where men with no authority from Muhammad appointed themselves as the leaders of Islam, both in a religious and political sense. In this regard they eclipsed the Catholic Church and some of the Popes in term of religious hypocrisy.

 

[paarsurrey]

Bahaullah: Gawhar Khanum

I started this thread with simple questions:
Bahaullah got married with his third wife, Gawhar Khanum:

1. who did solemnize this marriage?
2. and on what tradition?
3. It sure happened in the post Iqan period.

It is important to ascertain the religion Bahaullah himself followed till then.

Later with some research on internet about Gawhar Khanum- third wife of Bahaullah, I find some startling things about Bahaullah and his relationship with Gawhar Khanum :

1. "Bahaullah’s third marriage was contracted when he lived in Baghdad. Although details are sketchy, it seems that relatives of Bahaullah arranged the marriage in Kashan, Persia, where the woman, Gawhar Khanum lived. She was then sent with her brother to Bahaullah in Baghdad. This arrangement was meant to honor both Bahaullah and Gawhar Khanum. For Bahaullah to have refused her hand in marriage would have been highly disrespectful to those involved and especially damaging to the woman’s reputation."
2. "Bahá’u’lláh also married Gawhar Khánum, a widow of a martyr. Her age was not known, the couple also only had one child; Furúghíyyih. Gawhar Khánum was a maid to Ásíyih Khánum."

Regards

 

[CG Didymus]

Jesus taught neither monogamy, nor polygamy.

Polygamy had been an undeniable established norm amongst many of the Jewish prophets and it was still being practiced by many Jews when Christ came along.

Jewish polygamy clashed with Roman monogamy at the time of the early church:

"When the Christian Church came into being, polygamy was still practiced by the Jews. It is true that we find no references to it in the New Testament; and from this some have inferred that it must have fallen into disuse, and that at the time of our Lord the Jewish people had become monogamous. But the conclusion appears to be unwarranted. Josephus in two places speaks of polygamy as a recognized institution: and Justin Martyr makes it a matter of reproach to Trypho that the Jewish teachers permitted a man to have several wives. Indeed when in 212 A.D. the lex Antoniana de civitate gave the rights of Roman Citizenship to great numbers of Jews, it was found necessary to tolerate polygamy among them, even though it was against Roman law for a citizen to have more than one wife. In 285 A.D. a constitution of Diocletian and Maximian interdicted polygamy to all subjects of the empire without exception. But with the Jews, at least, the enactment failed of its effect; and in 393 A.D. a special law was issued by Theodosius to compel the Jews to relinquish this national custom. Even so they were not induced to conform."

Polygamy in Christianity - Wikipedia

So, as far as any Scripture from any religion prior to the Baha'i Faith, God didn't care one way or another about monogamy or polygamy?

 

[Dawnofhope]

So, as far as any Scripture from any religion prior to the Baha'i Faith, God didn't care one way or another about monogamy or polygamy?

I would reframe the question to make it less leading

Instead, I would ask what each religious teacher taught about the matter. If you are wanting to consider a Baha'i paradigm then the Manifestations of God are a useful starting point.

Moses didn't explicitly teach monogamy and He had two wives.

Christ didn't explicitly teach monogamy and He never married. The apostle Paul taught that church elders or deacons should have just one wife.

Polygamy in Christianity - Wikipedia

Muhammad taught that a man could have more than one wife, up to four if He could treat them with equal justice. Muhammad had 13 wives.

Baha'u'llah taught a man could have two wives if He could treat them with equal justice. Baha'u'llah had three wives. Abdu'l-Baha had one wife and interpreted Baha'u'llah's verse in the Kitab-i-Aqdas to mean monogamy as it was impossible to treat two wives with equal justice.

Its important to remember that Polygamy played an important role in ensuring all woman were part of a family and protected in societies very different from our own. Marriages were also a way of securing allegiances between different tribes as with King David and Muhammad.

So the issue is one of priority. With progressive revelation and the development of civilisation, humanity now accepts monogamy as the only accepted norm, particularly in the West.

 

[paarsurrey]

Bahaullah: Gawhar Khanum

I started this thread with simple questions:
Bahaullah got married with his third wife, Gawhar Khanum:

1. who did solemnize this marriage?
2. and on what tradition?
3. It sure happened in the post Iqan period.

It is important to ascertain the religion Bahaullah himself followed till then.

Later with some research on internet about Gawhar Khanum- third wife of Bahaullah, I find some startling things about Bahaullah and his relationship with Gawhar Khanum :

1. "Bahaullah’s third marriage was contracted when he lived in Baghdad. Although details are sketchy, it seems that relatives of Bahaullah arranged the marriage in Kashan, Persia, where the woman, Gawhar Khanum lived. She was then sent with her brother to Bahaullah in Baghdad. This arrangement was meant to honor both Bahaullah and Gawhar Khanum. For Bahaullah to have refused her hand in marriage would have been highly disrespectful to those involved and especially damaging to the woman’s reputation."
2. "Bahá’u’lláh also married Gawhar Khánum, a widow of a martyr. Her age was not known, the couple also only had one child; Furúghíyyih. Gawhar Khánum was a maid to Ásíyih Khánum."

It seems Bahaullah and his followers suppressed information about Gawhar Khanum and as to how Bahaullah unjustly and inhumanly dealt with her.

The above information suggests following questions/apprehensions:

1. Gawhar Khánum was a maid to Ásíyih Khánum, how come Bahaullah established relationship with Gawhar Khánum?
2. If the relationship was disrespectful to Gawhar Khánum, why it was not disrespectful to the other party , namely, Bahaullah?
3. Why Gawhar Khánum's brother had to intervene in the matter and had to ask Bahaullah to regularize it?
4. Later when the baby-girl was of 2/3 years of age or even less, why did Bahaullah desert Gawhar Khánum and her little child to live with her (Gawhar Khánum's) brother?
5. What provisions did Bahaullah make for the upbringing of the baby-girl and Gawhar Khánum while they lived with her brother.
6. Was Gawhar Khánum forced to become a Bahai?
7. Later Gawhar Khánum and her girl-child from Bahaullah were excommunicated to deprive them their rights in Bahaullah's property/inheritance ?

Were all the above acts just and humane, please?

Regards

 

[TransmutingSoul]

It seems Bahaullah and his followers suppressed information about Gawhar Khanum and as to how Bahaullah unjustly and inhumanly dealt with her.

The above information suggests following questions/apprehensions:

1. Gawhar Khánum was a maid to Ásíyih Khánum, how come Bahaullah established relationship with Gawhar Khánum?
2. If the relationship was disrespectful to Gawhar Khánum, why it was not disrespectful to the other party , namely, Bahaullah?
3. Why Gawhar Khánum's brother had to intervene in the matter and had to ask Bahaullah to regularize it?
4. Later when the baby-girl was of 2/3 years of age or even less, why did Bahaullah desert Gawhar Khánum and her little child to live with her (Gawhar Khánum's) brother?
5. What provisions did Bahaullah make for the upbringing of the baby-girl and Gawhar Khánum while they lived with her brother.
6. Was Gawhar Khánum forced to become a Bahai?
7. Later when Abdul Baha became successor to Bahaullah, did Abdul Baha expel/excommunicate Gawhar Khánum and her girl-child to deprive them their rights in Bahaullah's property/inheritance ?

Were all the above acts just and humane, please?

Regards

Where are you sourcing your information?

That will most likely answer the question.

Point to consider. How just did Muhammad treat His wives and where should I look to find accurate information?

Are you treating Baha'u'llah, as many in the past and present have treated Muhammad?

Regards Tony