• 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!

The Baha'i belief about animal behavior, scientific or not?

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Thanks. Good to know you are enjoying the posts. :)
After numerous debates with Baha'is it seems that any mistake or grievous error of the leaders, is brushed aside by claiming it is a metaphor.
Four wives instead of three is a metaphor. Banishing via declaring family members all covenant breakers is a metaphor. Making up Baha'i communities where none exist to mislead is a metaphor. Anyone pointing it out is just a metaphor for evil.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Ok so let's see how Abdu'l-Baha responded to a scientific question:

"Thou hast written regarding the four canine teeth in man, saying that these teeth, two in the upper jaw and two in the lower, are for the purpose of eating meat. Know thou that these four teeth are not created for meat-eating, although one can eat meat with them. All the teeth of man are made for eating fruit, cereals and vegetables. These four teeth, however, are designed for breaking hard shells, such as those of almonds." (Helen Bassett Hornby, Lights of Guidance: A Baha’i Reference File, chap. XXIV, no. 1007.)
According to Baha'i zoology, Canine teeth are for breaking almond nuts (kids please don't try this at home).
Man wouldn't have survived very long if he did that. Vitamin B12 you have to eat meat for proper brain health and without it I doubt we would have had such developed brains that we have today.
 

spirit_of_dawn

Active Member
I have a cat that will follow me when I walk the dog. But, I don't understand it... why don't they fight each other to the death like normal ferocious animals?

You are mistaken. Your cat and dog are metaphors. In reality they are doves and as Abdu'l-Baha said:

The meeting of two doves is a peace meeting.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
I extracted some points after reading a few statements uttered by Abdu'l-Baha -the second Baha'i leader- that describe the behavior of some animals. These are the points:

  • Domestic animals live in flocks and herds.
  • Domestic animals love and associate with each other.
  • Sheep, cows and horses graze together in concord and agreement.
  • ferocious animals and birds of prey are just the reverse of the domestic.
  • ferocious animals are never seen associating in love and fellowship.
  • ferocious animals live in solitary and alone or with a single mate.
  • When ferocious animals (like dogs, wolves, tigers, and lions) see each other, they manifest the utmost ferocity and fight to the death.
  • Ferocious animals, as soon as they meet, attack and fight with each other, tear each other to pieces and it is impossible for them to live peaceably together in one spot. They are all unsociable and fierce.
  • Domestic birds show fellowship and love.
  • if a dove from the east and a dove from the west, a dove from the north and a dove from the south chance to arrive, at the same time, in one spot, they immediately associate in harmony.
  • The meeting of two doves is a peace meeting.
  • When an eagle meets another eagle, there is a furious battle.
I believe many of the aforementioned statements are incorrect and are not in line with scientific observations. How do Baha'is reconcile the above statements with the Principle of Conformance of Science With Religion?

Sources:
"The blessed animals engage in no patriotic quarrels. They are in the utmost fellowship with one another and live together in harmony. For example, if a dove from the east and a dove from the west, a dove from the north and a dove from the south chance to arrive, at the same time, in one spot, they immediately associate in harmony. So is it with all the blessed animals and birds. But the ferocious animals, as soon as they meet, attack and fight with each other, tear each other to pieces and it is impossible for them to live peaceably together in one spot. They are all unsociable and fierce, savage and combative fighters." (Selections from the writings of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 416)​

"Study the law of affinity among the domestic animals. They manifest fellowship, they live in flocks and herds; the love of association is evident among them. Among birds we see evidences of instinctive fellowship and love. But the ferocious animals and birds of prey are just the reverse of the domestic. Sheep, cows and horses graze together in concord and agreement, but ferocious animals are never seen associating in love and fellowship. Each lives solitary and alone or with a single mate. When they see each other, they manifest the utmost ferocity. Dogs pounce upon dogs; wolves, tigers, lions rage, snarl and fight to the death. Their ferocity is instinctive. There is a creative reason for it. Birds of prey, like eagles and hawks, live solitary and build their nests apart, but doves fly in flocks and nest in the same branches. When an eagle meets another eagle, there is a furious battle. The meeting of two doves is a peace meeting. Therefore, it is evident that these blessed characteristics as well as the reverse are found among the creatures of a lower kingdom."(The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 207)​

It is not just unscientific. It is just wrong.
 

Marcion

gopa of humanity's controversial Taraka Brahma
Absolutely! It's the attitude that if I disagree with your belief, that means I hate your belief. Marcion, in reality, I do disagree with many of your beliefs, but I really don't think you think I hate your beliefs.
Beliefs? Did I discuss my beliefs on this forum?

Religion is about beliefs, Tantra is about actual practices.
Which practices does Bahaullah teach or prescribe to his followers?
 
Last edited:

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
You are mistaken. Your cat and dog are metaphors. In reality they are doves and as Abdu'l-Baha said:

The meeting of two doves is a peace meeting.
He had never been around doves much. My daughter raised those things for awhile. Oops. sorry ... I forgot it's a metaphor.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
You are mistaken. Your cat and dog are metaphors. In reality they are doves and as Abdu'l-Baha said:

The meeting of two doves is a peace meeting.
Oh, now that explains a lot. So, although they look like a cat and a dog to my material eyes, in reality, they are doves. I've been blind to the truth all these years. Thank you so much. I'm going to go buy them some bird seed right now.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
He had never been around doves much. My daughter raised those things for awhile. Oops. sorry ... I forgot it's a metaphor.
My metaphor with a long tail, four legs and sharp teeth and went "meow", ate one of my metaphors that had two shinny legs, a beak, and had wings. What is the spiritual and prophetic meaning in this?
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
My metaphor with a long tail, four legs and sharp teeth and went "meow", ate one of my metaphors that had two shinny legs, a beak, and had wings. What is the spiritual and prophetic meaning in this?
It all points to the fact that Baha'u'llah is the new prophet for mankind, that much is obvious. Jeepers, any fool could see that connection. The long tail and sharp teeth represent what the world needs, as it's so messed up, and the two skinny legs and one beaked one is mankind. So it symbolizes the destruction of sin, and the light of the beautiful golden tree, the dawn of beauty, the most beloved of all, the one true great one, the maker of destiny, coming to the earth.
But of course it is up to you to investigate this for yourself, but if you have any brains at all, it'' be as plain as the muticoloured peacock tail
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
Is it supposed to be scientific? I'd give it the benefit of doubt and lean towards that they were not meant as literal. A good approach to many if not most religious texts.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
He no his father also obviously didn't watch them long enough to observe the homosexual behaviour in animals.

List of birds displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia

That is very far from the only thing that
shows he had no idea what he was talking
about, when it would have been so easy to
observe or ask around.

It is good though, in that is so nicely underscores
the fact thst RELIGIOUS "TEACHERS" JUST MAKE
THINGS UP!!
 
Top