• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Bahai - What do you think about free-bahais?

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
I do not think Bahais can ever be free. The have to follow what Bahaollah said and what is mandated by their House of Justice at any moment.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
So much for Baha'u'llah setting up the Baha'i faith in such a way that dissent and splitting into different groups would not happen.
 

Exaltist Ethan

Bridging the Gap Between Believers and Skeptics
So much for Baha'u'llah setting up the Baha'i faith in such a way that dissent and splitting into different groups would not happen.

If he had just said, "I am the prophet. My children are not. Follow what I say." And then established a leadership order based on that, rather than causing the nepotism of Abdul'Baha and Shoghi Effendi, I think most of the schisms in this religion wouldn't be there. Many Baha'is are perfectly okay following Baha'u'llah, but doesn't see the legitimacy of his kinship. Although in their defense Shoghi did translate a lot of Baha'i scriptures in English and helped adopt Baha'i standards for the West. And Abdul'Baha rejected his father's belief in polygamy, as Baha'u'llah himself had two wives. Abdul and Effendi did a lot of work to help create the Baha'i Faith we know today but because the religion had so many leaders people got power-hungry and decided to create their own Baha'i Faiths - such as Free Baha'is and Beha'is / Unitarian Baha'is. But every Baha'i Faith religion that isn't the centralized one located in Haifa is not only covenant breaking but only exists with a few hundred followers. The main Faith has roughly eight million. In the grander scope of things, these broken sects will eventually disappear over time and the centralized, Haifa version of the Baha'i Faith will continue to exist and flourish with the help of the now established Universal House of Justice.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
If he had just said, "I am the prophet. My children are not. Follow what I say." And then established a leadership order based on that, rather than causing the nepotism of Abdul'Baha and Shoghi Effendi, I think most of the schisms in this religion wouldn't be there. Many Baha'is are perfectly okay following Baha'u'llah, but doesn't see the legitimacy of his kinship. Although in their defense Shoghi did translate a lot of Baha'i scriptures in English and helped adopt Baha'i standards for the West. And Abdul'Baha rejected his father's belief in polygamy, as Baha'u'llah himself had two wives. Abdul and Effendi did a lot of work to help create the Baha'i Faith we know today but because the religion had so many leaders people got power-hungry and decided to create their own Baha'i Faiths - such as Free Baha'is and Beha'is / Unitarian Baha'is. But every Baha'i Faith religion that isn't the centralized one located in Haifa is not only covenant breaking but only exists with a few hundred followers. The main Faith has roughly eight million. In the grander scope of things, these broken sects will eventually disappear over time and the centralized, Haifa version of the Baha'i Faith will continue to exist and flourish with the help of the now established Universal House of Justice.

I did not know that Baha'u'llah had more than one wife and I looked it up and found he had 3 wives and it is justified with his living under the previous dispensation (Islam) and it's laws.
But it seems that Baha'u'llah did teach that a Baha'i could have 2 wives while Abdul-Baha taught that they could have only one.
I suppose that Baha'u'llah's friends and family were those closest and whom he could trust and who knew his teachings.
But people will be people and splits were bound to happen even if Baha'u'llah is meant to have set up a system to limit that.
Interestingly I remember seeing disagreement between Abdul and Shoghi over an interpretation of a Daniel prophecy but I guess they had to work closely enough to smooth anything like that over.
 

Exaltist Ethan

Bridging the Gap Between Believers and Skeptics
So you would freely associate with them even though the Baha'i faith teaches to shun covenant breakers if I recall?

This is a great point that needed to be said. However, with that being said Baha'is have a high degree of spiritual autonomy and Baha'u'llah stressed the concept of, "personal investigation of truth." Plus the Seeker of White Light is a Baha'i in training so he may not know all the ins and outs of his own religion yet.

However, that was a great point that I should have pointed out. Good job!
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Thanks, I would never have read about them without you bringing them up. Now the problem is... Which Baha'i group is telling the truth?

Everyone is free.
No, that is not what is being asked. What do you think about the teachings and beliefs of the Free-Baha'is?

So you would freely associate with them even though the Baha'i faith teaches to shun covenant breakers if I recall?
Yes, that is exactly right. All you have to do is read what the Free Baha'is believe, and the problem becomes obvious. Here's from the link...
Lady Ruth and Hermann Zimmer through divine guidance came to the conclusion that the position of Guardianship which Shoghi Effendi, grandson of Abdu’l Baha, claimed for himself was based on a fraudulent Will of Abdu’l Baha. Shoghi Effendi changed world’s most unpolitical religion into a political religion, ignoring the sayings of Abdu’l-Baha that “This religion could not be compressed into an Organisation. Shoghi built up an administration where the spirit of the Religion of Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha was completely missing. He became for himself a world dictator and a power hungry person who excommunicated all the members of the Abdu’l Baha’s family including his own parents.

It was after the death of Abdul Baha, that his Will was read initially only to few ‘old and recognised Baha’is’. Later it was made public after a few years. In the alleged Will of Abdul Baha, Shoghi Effendi was anointed as the Guardian of the cause. The announcement of Shoghi as the Guardian came as a shock to many Baha’is who doubted the veracity and authenticity of his appointment. This was because Abdul Baha never introduced Shoghi as his successor during his lifetime.

However, nobody dared to question the authenticity of the alleged Will, lest they be excommunicated, except for Lady Ruth White.
The link also talks about the "New History Society".
Mirza Ahmad Sohrab, a Persian-American author and a renowned Baha’i who served as a secretary and interpreter from 1912 to 1919 along with Lewis Chanler and his wife Julia formed the New History Society in 1929, in order to spread the teachings of the Baha’i faith. It was their independent effort to teach the principles of the Cause.​
It says...
Rabindranath Tagore from India addressed the New History Society" Then, "Within a week of Mr. Tagore’s significant meeting, Albert Einstein addressed our group from the same platform. The New History Society was brought to the attention of the whole country.

Shortly after this, Professor John Dewey addressed the Society followed by Count Ilya Tolstoy, who gave a couple of lectures stretched over a few weeks. So, it went on and on with great speakers, great crowds...

Looking at the gaining popularity of the Society, affairs in the Baha’i world neared the boiling point. The National Assembly thus wanted to settle the matter once and for all. Ahmad Sohrab was instructed to appear before the Local Board. Ahmad refused to appear. He knew he would be forced to accept uncompromising and unquestioning obedience and subservience to Shoghi Effendi, which he was not ready to comply.

Baha’i authorities wanted to destroy the new-born movement. Even if Ahmad Sohrab would have appeared in front of the Local Board, they would have ordered him to shut the Society. Just that they would not have expelled him from the faith.

Ahmad Sohrab was excommunicated by the National Assembly and Shoghi Effendi.

All interesting things, but it has nothing good to say about Shoghi Effendi, in fact it says some pretty gross things about him. And that's why those Baha'is got the boot and formed their own group.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Yes, that is exactly right. All you have to do is read what the Free Baha'is believe, and the problem becomes obvious. Here's from the link...

There is absolutely no problem CG. Except for the person/s who rebelled, even when the evidence was available. Also those that pursue this subject looking for problems, will also experience such a state of being, so I would offer just be fair and just CG.

Regards Tony
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Thanks, I would never have read about them without you bringing them up. Now the problem is... Which Baha'i group is telling the truth?

No, that is not what is being asked. What do you think about the teachings and beliefs of the Free-Baha'is?

Yes, that is exactly right. All you have to do is read what the Free Baha'is believe, and the problem becomes obvious. Here's from the link...
Lady Ruth and Hermann Zimmer through divine guidance came to the conclusion that the position of Guardianship which Shoghi Effendi, grandson of Abdu’l Baha, claimed for himself was based on a fraudulent Will of Abdu’l Baha. Shoghi Effendi changed world’s most unpolitical religion into a political religion, ignoring the sayings of Abdu’l-Baha that “This religion could not be compressed into an Organisation. Shoghi built up an administration where the spirit of the Religion of Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha was completely missing. He became for himself a world dictator and a power hungry person who excommunicated all the members of the Abdu’l Baha’s family including his own parents.

It was after the death of Abdul Baha, that his Will was read initially only to few ‘old and recognised Baha’is’. Later it was made public after a few years. In the alleged Will of Abdul Baha, Shoghi Effendi was anointed as the Guardian of the cause. The announcement of Shoghi as the Guardian came as a shock to many Baha’is who doubted the veracity and authenticity of his appointment. This was because Abdul Baha never introduced Shoghi as his successor during his lifetime.

However, nobody dared to question the authenticity of the alleged Will, lest they be excommunicated, except for Lady Ruth White.
The link also talks about the "New History Society".
Mirza Ahmad Sohrab, a Persian-American author and a renowned Baha’i who served as a secretary and interpreter from 1912 to 1919 along with Lewis Chanler and his wife Julia formed the New History Society in 1929, in order to spread the teachings of the Baha’i faith. It was their independent effort to teach the principles of the Cause.​
It says...
Rabindranath Tagore from India addressed the New History Society" Then, "Within a week of Mr. Tagore’s significant meeting, Albert Einstein addressed our group from the same platform. The New History Society was brought to the attention of the whole country.

Shortly after this, Professor John Dewey addressed the Society followed by Count Ilya Tolstoy, who gave a couple of lectures stretched over a few weeks. So, it went on and on with great speakers, great crowds...

Looking at the gaining popularity of the Society, affairs in the Baha’i world neared the boiling point. The National Assembly thus wanted to settle the matter once and for all. Ahmad Sohrab was instructed to appear before the Local Board. Ahmad refused to appear. He knew he would be forced to accept uncompromising and unquestioning obedience and subservience to Shoghi Effendi, which he was not ready to comply.

Baha’i authorities wanted to destroy the new-born movement. Even if Ahmad Sohrab would have appeared in front of the Local Board, they would have ordered him to shut the Society. Just that they would not have expelled him from the faith.

Ahmad Sohrab was excommunicated by the National Assembly and Shoghi Effendi.

All interesting things, but it has nothing good to say about Shoghi Effendi, in fact it says some pretty gross things about him. And that's why those Baha'is got the boot and formed their own group.
I don't even know what free Bahai means . Lollll.

But honestly I don't care...
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Bahais on this forum - What do you think about free-bahais?
And what do Baha'is think about free-Baha'is?

All Baha'i are free. In one cuts themselves off from Baha'i, they are already dead, albeit they seem to live for a while and plagiarize the name.
They contested the will that gave the guardianship of the Baha'i Faith to Shoghi Effendi. They claim that a handwriting expert said the will was a forgery.

There is absolutely no problem CG. Except for the person/s who rebelled, even when the evidence was available. Also those that pursue this subject looking for problems, will also experience such a state of being, so I would offer just be fair and just CG.
There absolutely was a problem, and the Baha'i leadership declared the people involved covenant-breakers.
Covenant-breaking is violating the Bahá’í Covenant, which is the concept that someone who has declared themselves to be a Bahá’í accepts the authority of Bahá’u’lláh and his appointed successors: ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Shoghi Effendi, and the Universal House of Justice. Breaking the Covenant constitutes actively opposing the authorized head of the Bahá’í Faith or attempting to establish a sect with an alternative authoritative head while presenting oneself as a member of the Bahá’í community.[1]

Breaking the Covenant results in expulsion from the Bahá’í community and Bahá’ís are not to associate with someone who has been declared a Covenant-breaker...​

And what do you mean that "evidence" was available? They claimed they had evidence also. But the subject shouldn't be pursued? So, we should do like InvestigateTruth?

I don't even know what free Bahai means . Lollll.

But honestly I don't care...
It's easy to find out who they are... the OP provided the link to their website. But, contrary to calling yourself "InvestigateTruth", in this case you don't care? Without investigating? Oh course, because they are to be shunned, avoided and treated as if dead. And that's what a Baha'i thinks about these people calling themselves "free-Baha'is". Why not just say so?
 
Top