• 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!

Questions of interest to Bahai's

firedragon

Veteran Member
I wish to open a thread to make clear some questions that I personally have since of late going through the Bahai literature. I am not well versed on the Bahai faith I must say because the breath of literature is far too extensive to claim scholarship. It will take extensive and exclusive work of a long time to do that.

From the bit I know there are some questions I wish to ask and hope to get some responses and thank you in advance to anyone who could contribute.

First question I have is that Bahaullah (Hope its not offensive to use his name alone) in the book of Iqan. Iqan has been translated as "certitude". I doubt many people understand this word though. Iqan comes from Yaqath (Yaqah) which means faith with absolute confidence.

Anyway, in the kithab I iqan he mentions certain signs or as he says in Arabic "Alaamathin" which actually means given signs. These are signs you are to be so sure of with no doubt. He is quoting the Shi'i ahadith called Bihar al anwar directly. Let me cut and paste from the Kithab I Iqan.

"In our Qā’im there shall be four signs from four Prophets, Moses, Jesus, Joseph, and Muḥammad. The sign from Moses, is fear and expectation; from Jesus, that which was spoken of Him; from Joseph, imprisonment and dissimulation; from Muḥammad, the revelation of a Book similar to the Qur’ān."

Now the question I have is him quoting Bihar al Anwar the Hadith is practically the same but yet contradicts completely when it comes to the prophet Muhammed. Bahaullah says "Like the Quran" or "Mathli al Qur'an" is a sign for sure probably referring to himself or Bab or both who are the "Qaim" or the "Mahdi". Now the problem lies in the fact that Bihar al anwar where he quotes from does not say "a book like Qur'an", but the sign of Muhammed is the sword. The Qaim is supposed to be a warrior who brings the sword along with 3 other signs from 3 other prophets. This part has been changed to a book.

Is Bahaullah claiming signs of the Mahdi for himself? If so, how would one of the signs suddenly change from sword to a book like Qur'an? This actually is just one of the points in this same narration, there are many others. Also please note that he does not use the Muhammeds character and biography part of the Hadith. The Hadith clearly says that the Mahdi will have the character of Muhammed or similar in biography to be exact in rendition. The arabic word is "Seerah" exactly which means the Mahdi will have the same biography of Muhammed and the Shi'i contention is Muhammed led a state and warriors. And the word "Assaifa" meaning "Sword".

Could someone explain? Thank you in advance.
Peace.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
I wonder if our Bahai friends here can explain anything like that, since most have a Christian background. Four manifestations? and who is this Joseph (Yusuf). Never heard his name among the Bahai manifestations. Wikipedia gives this information:

"Bahaollah and Abdul Baha referred to several personages as manifestations, they include Adam, Noah, Krishna, Moses, Abraham, Zoroaster, Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad. The Báb, as well as Bahaollah, were included in this definition."
Manifestation of God - Wikipedia

Again, how come I find Bab in this list. He was the Mahdi according to Bahais and not a manifestation. Or Abdul Baha forgot that there must be a date difference of 1,000 years between two manifestations, which was not there between Buddha, Jesus and Mohammad. So this 1000 years thing is not true. It is a canard. And if it is not true, if Bab and Bahaollah can be contemporaries and manifestations of Allah, then nothing bars the other contemporaries, Joseph Smith and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad also to be manifestations of Allah. Why do the Bahais refuse them? Could our Bahai friends should enlighten us?

Could this be that Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi exceeded their brief and corrupted the message of Allah?
 
Last edited:

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
I wish to open a thread to make clear some questions that I personally have since of late going through the Bahai literature. I am not well versed on the Bahai faith I must say because the breath of literature is far too extensive to claim scholarship. It will take extensive and exclusive work of a long time to do that.

From the bit I know there are some questions I wish to ask and hope to get some responses and thank you in advance to anyone who could contribute.

First question I have is that Bahaullah (Hope its not offensive to use his name alone) in the book of Iqan. Iqan has been translated as "certitude". I doubt many people understand this word though. Iqan comes from Yaqath (Yaqah) which means faith with absolute confidence.

Anyway, in the kithab I iqan he mentions certain signs or as he says in Arabic "Alaamathin" which actually means given signs. These are signs you are to be so sure of with no doubt. He is quoting the Shi'i ahadith called Bihar al anwar directly. Let me cut and paste from the Kithab I Iqan.

"In our Qā’im there shall be four signs from four Prophets, Moses, Jesus, Joseph, and Muḥammad. The sign from Moses, is fear and expectation; from Jesus, that which was spoken of Him; from Joseph, imprisonment and dissimulation; from Muḥammad, the revelation of a Book similar to the Qur’ān."

Now the question I have is him quoting Bihar al Anwar the Hadith is practically the same but yet contradicts completely when it comes to the prophet Muhammed. Bahaullah says "Like the Quran" or "Mathli al Qur'an" is a sign for sure probably referring to himself or Bab or both who are the "Qaim" or the "Mahdi". Now the problem lies in the fact that Bihar al anwar where he quotes from does not say "a book like Qur'an", but the sign of Muhammed is the sword. The Qaim is supposed to be a warrior who brings the sword along with 3 other signs from 3 other prophets. This part has been changed to a book.

Is Bahaullah claiming signs of the Mahdi for himself? If so, how would one of the signs suddenly change from sword to a book like Qur'an? This actually is just one of the points in this same narration, there are many others. Also please note that he does not use the Muhammeds character and biography part of the Hadith. The Hadith clearly says that the Mahdi will have the character of Muhammed or similar in biography to be exact in rendition. The arabic word is "Seerah" exactly which means the Mahdi will have the same biography of Muhammed and the Shi'i contention is Muhammed led a state and warriors. And the word "Assaifa" meaning "Sword".

Could someone explain? Thank you in advance.
Peace.

I’m not familiar with the passage you quote, the translation, or the particular Hadith. I have limited understanding of Islamic eschatology. The Bab, not Bahá’u’lláh, is considered the Mahdi. The Kitab-I-Iqan was written in Baghdad before Bahá’u’lláh openly proclaimed to be Him whom God shall make manifest or the One Promised by the Bab. So any illusions Bahá’u’lláh makes to His own station would be veiled.

Most Baha’is on this forum such as myself have grown up with Christianity. OTOH @InvestigateTruth grew up in an Islamic country.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
I wonder if our Bahai friends here can explain anything like that, since most have a Christian background. Four manifestations? and who is this Joseph (Yusuf). Never heard his name among the Bahai manifestations. Wikipedia gives this information:

"Bahaollah and Abdul Baha referred to several personages as manifestations, they include Adam, Noah, Krishna, Moses, Abraham, Zoroaster, Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad. The Báb, as well as Bahaollah, were included in this definition."
Manifestation of God - Wikipedia

Joseph is an important Prophet in both the Torah and Quran. He is not considered a Manifestation of God as he did not establish an independent religion.

Again, how come I find Bab in this list. He was the Mahdi according to Bahais and not a manifestation.

Baha’is consider the Bab both the Mahdi and a Manifestation of God.

Or Abdul Baha forgot that there must be a date difference of 1,000 years between two manifestations, which was not there between Buddha, Jesus and Mohammad.

That is incorrect. Baha’is believe the Manifestation after Bahá’u’lláh will take at least one thousand years to come. The one thousand years is not applicable to other Manifestations of God.

then nothing bars the other contemporaries, Joseph Smith and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad also to be manifestations of Allah. Why do the Bahais refuse them? Could our Bahai friends should enlighten us?

Given the next Manifestation of God will not come for at least one thousand years, then Mírza Ghulam and Joseph Smith are not considered Manifestations of God.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
But why, my dear friend. They did all that Bahaollah did, established religions on the orders of Allah. Then why not?
You should have one rule for all, and not be arbitrary. I do not modify my beliefs in any way.
For example, I consider both of us to be Brahman and even Hitler and Osama and Caliph Ibrahim.
They said they were prophets and Mahdi with message from Allah, so you, a Bahai, need to accept that, without any doubt. That is what Bahaollah said.
Allah is great in his mercy as well as in his punishment. Surely, you do not want to mar your record.
 
Last edited:

firedragon

Veteran Member
I’m not familiar with the passage you quote, the translation, or the particular Hadith. I have limited understanding of Islamic eschatology. The Bab, not Bahá’u’lláh, is considered the Mahdi. The Kitab-I-Iqan was written in Baghdad before Bahá’u’lláh openly proclaimed to be Him whom God shall make manifest or the One Promised by the Bab. So any illusions Bahá’u’lláh makes to His own station would be veiled.

Most Baha’is on this forum such as myself have grown up with Christianity. OTOH @InvestigateTruth grew up in an Islamic country.

This is from your book, and the question is not about eschatology but the misquotation of a Hadith taken from the Ship Hadith. The Hadith is on eschatology but the question is not about eschatology.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I feel this is such an important discrepancy in the sacred book of Bahaullah but not a single person even attempts a response. Not even an attempt. It seems like its all dogmatic belief but not analysis.

Peace.
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
It seems like its all dogmatic belief but not analysis.

Peace.
The word “all” is exaggerating. You have demonstrated that there are some points where dogmatic belief is required, that does not make everything said by Baha’u’llah false by a long stretch.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Joseph is an important Prophet in both the Torah and Quran. He is not considered a Manifestation of God as he did not establish an independent religion.
Then what is the Baha'i explanation of why Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses, all part of Judaism, are manifestations?
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Anyway, in the kithab I iqan he mentions certain signs or as he says in Arabic "Alaamathin" which actually means given signs. These are signs you are to be so sure of with no doubt. He is quoting the Shi'i ahadith called Bihar al anwar directly. Let me cut and paste from the Kithab I Iqan.

"In our Qā’im there shall be four signs from four Prophets, Moses, Jesus, Joseph, and Muḥammad. The sign from Moses, is fear and expectation; from Jesus, that which was spoken of Him; from Joseph, imprisonment and dissimulation; from Muḥammad, the revelation of a Book similar to the Qur’ān."

Now the question I have is him quoting Bihar al Anwar the Hadith is practically the same but yet contradicts completely when it comes to the prophet Muhammed. Bahaullah says "Like the Quran" or "Mathli al Qur'an" is a sign for sure probably referring to himself or Bab or both who are the "Qaim" or the "Mahdi". Now the problem lies in the fact that Bihar al anwar where he quotes from does not say "a book like Qur'an", but the sign of Muhammed is the sword. The Qaim is supposed to be a warrior who brings the sword along with 3 other signs from 3 other prophets. This part has been changed to a book.
Yes, Bahaullah has reinterpreted the hadith. He refers to a Hadith from Bihar, and then replaced "Sword" with "a Book like Quran". By doing this, He also teaches that, the symbolic interpretation of the sword of Muhammad, is Quran in this Hadith and thus, the similarity of the Qaim and Muhammad is His sword, which is the Book of Qaim.

In another Book, called Gems of divine mysteries, Bahaullah wrote:


"Know thou that since the sword is an instrument that divideth and cleaveth asunder, and since there proceedeth from the mouth of the Prophets and the Chosen Ones of God that which separateth the believer from the infidel and the lover from the beloved, this term hath been so employed, and apart from this dividing and separating no other meaning is intended. Thus, when He Who is the Primal Point and the eternal Sun desireth, by the leave of God, to gather together all creation, to raise them up from the graves of their own selves, and to divide them one from another, He shall pronounce but one verse from Him, and this verse will distinguish truth from error from this day unto the Day of Resurrection. What sword is sharper than this heavenly sword, what blade For whoso believeth in that which hath been revealed unto him is a true believer and whoso turneth away is an infidel, and such an irrevocable separation occurreth between them that they will cease to consort and associate with each other in this world. And so it is between father and son, for should the son believe and the father deny, they will be severed and forever dissociated from each other. Nay rather, thou witnesseth how the son slayeth the father and the father the son. Consider in the same light all that We have explained and related unto thee.

Wert thou to behold all things with the eye of discernment, thou wouldst indeed see that this divine sword doth cleave asunder generations. Would that ye could understand it! All this is by virtue of the word of separation that is manifested on the Day of Judgement and Separation, were the people to take heed in the days of their Lord. Nay, couldst thou but sharpen thy sight and refine thy heart, thou wouldst witness that all the material swords which in every day and age have slain the infidels and waged war against the impious proceed from this divine and invisible sword. Open then thine eyes, that thou mayest behold all that We have revealed to thee and attain unto that which none other hath attained. We verily exclaim: “Praise be to God, He Who is the Lord of the Day of Reckoning!”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gems of Divine Mysteries (Javáhiru’l-Asrár), Pages 31-59


There are other Hadithes that denote, the Qaim comes with new Quran.

In Bahai view, this is fulfilled by the Bab, as He wrote a Book called Qayyoum ul asma, which has style of Quran. You can find pdf of that Book:

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&sour...FjADegQIARAH&usg=AOvVaw2eeWYY-cWCdwHVLbvQe5_E
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
@firedragon

I could find other Hadithes in Bihar, that indicates, the sword can have a symbolic meaning. Here are 2 hadithes:


19- Ikmaaluddin: It is narrated through the same chain of narrators from Aban
bin Taghlib that Imam Ja’far Sadiq (a.s.) said:
“Very soon 313 persons will come to your Masjid – that is the Masjid of
Mecca – the people of Mecca will know that they are not natives. All of them
will be carrying swords and each of the swords will be inscribed with the
Kalimah from each of which a hundred Kalimas will be coming out.
Then the Almighty Allah shall send a breeze that shall call out in every
valley, ‘This is Mahdi, who shall judge like Prophet Dawood and Sulaiman
and he would not ask for evidence.’”

20- Ghaibat Nomani: It is narrated from Ali bin Husain from Muhammad bin
Yahya Attar from Muhammad bin Hasan Raazi from Muhammad bin Ali Kufi from
Ismail bin Mahran from Muhammad bin Abu Hamza from Aban bin Taghlib, a
similar tradition and in that he says:
“Every sword will be inscribed with a thousand words and each word
will be a key to a thousand words.”



Feel free to ask all your questions. We can investigate together..
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
The word “all” is exaggerating. You have demonstrated that there are some points where dogmatic belief is required, that does not make everything said by Baha’u’llah false by a long stretch.

Well, you misquoted me mate. I didn't say everything Bahaullah said was false, I said the belief seems to be all dogmatic belief without analysis. Thats the reason some questions no one attempts to respond to objectively.

Thanks.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
@firedragon

I could find other Hadithes in Bihar, that indicates, the sword can have a symbolic meaning. Here are 2 hadithes:


19- Ikmaaluddin: It is narrated through the same chain of narrators from Aban
bin Taghlib that Imam Ja’far Sadiq (a.s.) said:
“Very soon 313 persons will come to your Masjid – that is the Masjid of
Mecca – the people of Mecca will know that they are not natives. All of them
will be carrying swords and each of the swords will be inscribed with the
Kalimah from each of which a hundred Kalimas will be coming out.
Then the Almighty Allah shall send a breeze that shall call out in every
valley, ‘This is Mahdi, who shall judge like Prophet Dawood and Sulaiman
and he would not ask for evidence.’”

20- Ghaibat Nomani: It is narrated from Ali bin Husain from Muhammad bin
Yahya Attar from Muhammad bin Hasan Raazi from Muhammad bin Ali Kufi from
Ismail bin Mahran from Muhammad bin Abu Hamza from Aban bin Taghlib, a
similar tradition and in that he says:
“Every sword will be inscribed with a thousand words and each word
will be a key to a thousand words.”



Feel free to ask all your questions. We can investigate together..

Yet none of them mean "A scripture like the Qur'an".

Sis, if you are looking for similar ahadith, take all the ahadith in by Bihar on the Mahdi and see how much you would never ever in your life be able to reconcile. And anyway in the case of the ahadith you are quoting the swords are not meant to be symbolic, it is the inscriptions on the sword that are symbolic. The Kalimas are not actually knocked into the body of the swords, its symbolic. Its not the swords that are symbolic.
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
This is from your book, and the question is not about eschatology but the misquotation of a Hadith taken from the Ship Hadith. The Hadith is on eschatology but the question is not about eschatology.
I don't see it as misquote. We believe Bahaullah as Manifestation of God has Authority to rephrase, explain, interpret them.
Can we tell God why you are not quoting the hadith exactly? Or why are you interpreting the sword as Book?
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Yet none of them mean "A scripture like the Qur'an".

Sis, if you are looking for similar ahadith, take all the ahadith in by Bihar on the Mahdi and see how much you would never ever in your life be able to reconcile. And anyway in the case of the ahadith you are quoting the swords are not meant to be symbolic, it is the inscriptions on the sword that are symbolic. The Kalimas are not actually knocked into the body of the swords, its symbolic. Its not the swords that are symbolic.
It is the word of God, likened to sword. We can see similar analogy in Old Testament.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Yes, Bahaullah has reinterpreted the hadith. He refers to a Hadith from Bihar, and then replaced "Sword" with "a Book like Quran". By doing this, He also teaches that, the symbolic interpretation of the sword of Muhammad, is Quran in this Hadith and thus, the similarity of the Qaim and Muhammad is His sword, which is the Book of Qaim.

In another Book, called Gems of divine mysteries, Bahaullah wrote:


"Know thou that since the sword is an instrument that divideth and cleaveth asunder, and since there proceedeth from the mouth of the Prophets and the Chosen Ones of God that which separateth the believer from the infidel and the lover from the beloved, this term hath been so employed, and apart from this dividing and separating no other meaning is intended. Thus, when He Who is the Primal Point and the eternal Sun desireth, by the leave of God, to gather together all creation, to raise them up from the graves of their own selves, and to divide them one from another, He shall pronounce but one verse from Him, and this verse will distinguish truth from error from this day unto the Day of Resurrection. What sword is sharper than this heavenly sword, what blade For whoso believeth in that which hath been revealed unto him is a true believer and whoso turneth away is an infidel, and such an irrevocable separation occurreth between them that they will cease to consort and associate with each other in this world. And so it is between father and son, for should the son believe and the father deny, they will be severed and forever dissociated from each other. Nay rather, thou witnesseth how the son slayeth the father and the father the son. Consider in the same light all that We have explained and related unto thee.

Wert thou to behold all things with the eye of discernment, thou wouldst indeed see that this divine sword doth cleave asunder generations. Would that ye could understand it! All this is by virtue of the word of separation that is manifested on the Day of Judgement and Separation, were the people to take heed in the days of their Lord. Nay, couldst thou but sharpen thy sight and refine thy heart, thou wouldst witness that all the material swords which in every day and age have slain the infidels and waged war against the impious proceed from this divine and invisible sword. Open then thine eyes, that thou mayest behold all that We have revealed to thee and attain unto that which none other hath attained. We verily exclaim: “Praise be to God, He Who is the Lord of the Day of Reckoning!”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gems of Divine Mysteries (Javáhiru’l-Asrár), Pages 31-59


There are other Hadithes that denote, the Qaim comes with new Quran.

In Bahai view, this is fulfilled by the Bab, as He wrote a Book called Qayyoum ul asma, which has style of Quran. You can find pdf of that Book:

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&sour...FjADegQIARAH&usg=AOvVaw2eeWYY-cWCdwHVLbvQe5_E

Yep. I did speak to a friend of mine and get the same answer that "the sword is symbolic".

No that's wrong. It is not meant as symbolic because it is written so.

You also missed the whole point. The ahadith is talking about the Mahdi having the same biography of the prophet Muhammed and he would come with the sword. Its very clearly stipulated. Do you understand the combination? This is not reinterpretation, this is change.

Anyway, I would like to ask you based on this "Qayyoom ul asma", I have not read this book but I opened your link. They are a collection of short Sarah's written by Bahaullah called Surathus Mulk, eeman, Ulama etc etc. Can you explain how it is in the "style of the Qur'an"?
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I don't see it as misquote. We believe Bahaullah as Manifestation of God has Authority to rephrase, explain, interpret them.
Can we tell God why you are not quoting the hadith exactly? Or why are you interpreting the sword as Book?

Sis. With all due respect, this forum is to discuss faiths, not impose one's faith upon another. Your answer is not valid to this thread which is opened to question.

Sorry but this is invalid.
 

ManSinha

Well-Known Member
He is not considered a Manifestation of God as he did not establish an independent religion
Hold it right there doctor - what "religion" did Krishna start? Don't tell me the Vaishnavas - they are not considered a separate religion

And Guru Nanak started what evolved into a bonafide new religion - whose following is about 3-4 times the Baha'i faith and he is called a "reformer"

I back up @Aupmanyav's statements - the inconsistencies are glaring and I wonder if you or any other Baha'i has a reasonable explanation other than the obvious one(s)
 
Last edited:

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Well, you misquoted me mate. I didn't say everything Bahaullah said was false, I said the belief seems to be all dogmatic belief without analysis. Thats the reason some questions no one attempts to respond to objectively.

Thanks.
You are using the “all” word again. For it “all” to be dogmatic it would have to all of it fail independent analysis. It does not
 
Top