Thoughts on the Baha'i Faith

[InvestigateTruth]

What do we know of lineages? Perhaps Joseph was of the line of Mohammad or someone else was of Hulagu Khan. That can be known only on examination of the DNA.

After Muhammad, His grand children, grand grand childeren, and whoever came from Muhammads lineage, got the title of "Syiid". And when they had childeren, they passed their title of Syiid to their childeren. That is how they kept track of their status as Syyids. So, then, even today you can find many people whose name starts with Syyid, which denotes they are from lineage of Muhammad.
As for the Bab, even before He was born, His father's name was Syid Muhammad Reza, so, the Bab's Parents were known to be from the lineage of Muhammad, before the Bab was born.
Now, in Islam, Muhammad and Shia Imams had said that the Mahdi will be from Muhammads lineage.

 

[Aupmanyav]

'Sayyid' or 'Mirza' - Mírzá Ḥusayn-ʻAlí Núr

Sayyid: Sayyid[a] (UK: /ˈsaɪɪd, ˈseɪjɪd/, US: /ˈsɑːjɪd/;Arabic: سيد‎ [ˈsæjjɪd], Persian: [sejˈjed]; meaning "Mister"; Arabic plural: سادة sādah; feminine: سيدة sayyidah) is an honorific title denoting people accepted as descendants of the Islamic prophet Muhammad and his cousin and son-in-law Ali (Ali ibn Abi Talib) through his grandsons, Hasan ibn Ali and Husayn ibn Ali, sons of Muhammad's daughter Fatimah and Ali.

Female sayyids are given the titles sayyida, syeda, alawiyah or sharifa. In some regions of the Islamic world, such as in India, the descendants of Muhammad are given the title amīr or mīr, meaning "commander", "general". The descendants of Muhammad honour the possession of family trees tracing back their ancestry.

Mirza: (/ˈmɜːrzə/ or /mɪərˈzɑː/; Persian: میرزا‎) is a name of Persian origin. It is used as a surname or prefix to identify patriarchal lineage. It is derived from a historical title of Persian origin (Mīrzā), denoting the rank of a royal prince, high nobleman, distinguished military commander, or a scholar.

Specifically, it was used as a title by and today signifies patriarchal lineage to the various Persian Empires, the Shirvanshahs and Circassians of the Caucasus, and mainly the Mughals / Moguls or Muslim Rajputs of the Indian Subcontinent. It was also a title bestowed upon members of the highest aristocracies in Tatar states, such as the Khanates of Kazan and Astrakhan and the Nogai Horde.

But the patronym does not say anything beyond this that person 1 is publicly accepted as the son of person 2. Who fathered the person 1 is a separate question altogether. Jesus was fathered by the Holy Ghost and not by Joseph, though Jesus is known as Yeshua ben Yusef.

 

[CG Didymus]

A person is allowed their own view and can interpret what has no interpretation, as long as they say it is theirs.

Passages that have been interpreted, can not have another official explanation.

Regards Tony

If a Baha'i has a view or a behavior that contradicts the Baha'i Faith, what do the Baha'is in leadership roles do? If you have laws, laws that you say come from God, then they need to be enforced. And, at some point, all Baha'is would have a uniform core of beliefs.

 

[CG Didymus]

After Muhammad, His grand children, grand grand childeren, and whoever came from Muhammads lineage, got the title of "Syiid". And when they had childeren, they passed their title of Syiid to their childeren. That is how they kept track of their status as Syyids. So, then, even today you can find many people whose name starts with Syyid, which denotes they are from lineage of Muhammad.
As for the Bab, even before He was born, His father's name was Syid Muhammad Reza, so, the Bab's Parents were known to be from the lineage of Muhammad, before the Bab was born.
Now, in Islam, Muhammad and Shia Imams had said that the Mahdi will be from Muhammads lineage.

How do you track people all the way back to Abraham? We don't even have anything about what Abraham believed and taught other than what is in the Bible. And, I guess what ever Muhammad and Baha'u'llah say he believed and did. But, we know a person's genealogy all the way back through to Abraham?

 

[CG Didymus]

They couldn't have been waiting for anyone else, because Sheykh Ahmad and Kazim, expected the Mahdi being from lineage of Muhammad, who appears in the year 60 AH. The only person claimed Mahdi in that year, was the Bab.

If, as one Baha'i keeps saying, that the "flesh" amounts to nothing... why all the concern over bloodlines? God only chooses people that were descendants of previous messengers? So Jesus was a distant relative of Krishna? I doubt that. But, Baha'is make their prophets related to King David and Abraham? Why? To "prove" a prophecy? Why bother when other prophecies are made meaningless by symbolic interpretations? Why not make all messengers "symbolically" related because they all came from God. And then, aren't we all "related"?

 

[CG Didymus]

Now, in Islam, Muhammad and Shia Imams had said that the Mahdi will be from Muhammads lineage.

And is this a "tradition" of men or something in a Holy Book?

 

[firedragon]

After Muhammad, His grand children, grand grand childeren, and whoever came from Muhammads lineage, got the title of "Syiid". And when they had childeren, they passed their title of Syiid to their childeren. That is how they kept track of their status as Syyids. So, then, even today you can find many people whose name starts with Syyid, which denotes they are from lineage of Muhammad.

Sayyid is a very very common name all over the world. Sayyid is an address. Like Sir or Mr.

There are some who claim to be descendants of Muhammed and they call themselves Sayyid and I personally know a young lady who is supposed to be a direct descendant of the prophet and she calls herself a Sayyida.

But a name starting with Sayyid is simply an expression of respect. Its so common in Asia and Arabian regions. It is just like the Malay name "Gnai" which mean "miss" and a lot of ladies are named as such. The name is used in a similar manner.

All of this said, the general Islamic practice is not revering any descendant of the prophet. There is no difference between a descendent of anyone. Few people have this special value for descendants of various people but its not a common practice.

As for the Bab, even before He was born, His father's name was Syid Muhammad Reza, so, the Bab's Parents were known to be from the lineage of Muhammad, before the Bab was born.

Im sorry, this is post hoc ergo propter hoc. There is no evidence that the Bab was a descendant of Muhammed. It is only a faith statement. There are hundreds and hundreds, maybe even thousands and thousands of people claiming they descend from Muhammed.

Sayyid Muhammad Reza if named as such is just a name like the millions of Muslims all over the world, and Arab Christians who are named Sayyid. This is an invalid claim you are making and someone taught you absolutely wrong.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Sayyid is a very very common name all over the world. Sayyid is an address. Like Sir or Mr.

There are some who claim to be descendants of Muhammed and they call themselves Sayyid and I personally know a young lady who is supposed to be a direct descendant of the prophet and she calls herself a Sayyida.

But a name starting with Sayyid is simply an expression of respect. Its so common in Asia and Arabian regions. It is just like the Malay name "Gnai" which mean "miss" and a lot of ladies are named as such. The name is used in a similar manner.

All of this said, the general Islamic practice is not revering any descendant of the prophet. There is no difference between a descendent of anyone. Few people have this special value for descendants of various people but its not a common practice.



Im sorry, this is post hoc ergo propter hoc. There is no evidence that the Bab was a descendant of Muhammed. It is only a faith statement. There are hundreds and hundreds, maybe even thousands and thousands of people claiming they descend from Muhammed.

Sayyid Muhammad Reza if named as such is just a name like the millions of Muslims all over the world, and Arab Christians who are named Sayyid. This is an invalid claim you are making and someone taught you absolutely wrong.

I quote from wikipedia:

Sayyids (who are Shia) often include the following titles in their names to indicate the figure from whom they trace their descent, while Sunni Sayyids often use the last name Shah or Hashmi.[15][16]



So, what you are saying is true mostly for the Sunni Muslims, but among Shia Muslims, Sayyid is one who they can trace his descent to Prophet through the Shia Imams.

 

[firedragon]

I quote from wikipedia:

Sayyids (who are Shia) often include the following titles in their names to indicate the figure from whom they trace their descent, while Sunni Sayyids often use the last name Shah or Hashmi.[15][16]



So, what you are saying is true mostly for the Sunni Muslims, but among Shia Muslims, Sayyid is one who they can trace his descent to Prophet through the Shia Imams.

Not really. Even Shias had the sayyid name just as a name. This is universal to all. Even Arab Christians. I said that already.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Not really. Even Shias had the sayyid name just as a name. This is universal to all. Even Arab Christians. I said that already.

Sure, there are people whose name is just Sayyid. There are people, Sayyid for them, in their name means descendants of Muhammad. There could be fake Sayyid too, just as there are true Sayyid, who are descendants of Muhammad.
As for the Bab, it is a matter of investigation, but according to history, his parents were known to be righteous people, and were known to be from lineage of Muhammad. This is just a peice of evidence, but I don't know if from this piece of evidence Alone, it can be proved the Bab really was a descendant of Muhammad.
For me, when I put many peices of evidences together, I can decide for myself that He was indeed the Mahdi, and descendant of Muhammad.

 

[firedragon]

Sure, there are people whose name is just Sayyid. There are people, Sayyid for them, in their name means descendants of Muhammad. There could be fake Sayyid too, just as there are true Sayyid, who are descendants of Muhammad.
As for the Bab, it is a matter of investigation, but according to history, his parents were known to be righteous people, and were known to be from lineage of Muhammad. This is just a peice of evidence, but I don't know if from this piece of evidence Alone, it can be proved the Bab really was a descendant of Muhammad.
For me, when I put many peices of evidences together, I can decide for myself that He was indeed the Mahdi, and descendant of Muhammad.

Whats your evidence that he is a descendant? Forget Mahdi for now.

 

[arthra]

I realize I'm a bit late on this thread but am willing to share a few thoughts here...

Sirona wrote:

With the Baha’is, I think it’s a similar thing, there always seems to be yet another explanation on why a Big God desperately needs us tiny specks on the surface of Earth so that he authorizes some of those specks to explain Him to the others.

My reply:

I share from the Baha'i Writings:

There are four kinds of love. The first is the love that flows from God to man; it consists of the inexhaustible graces, the Divine effulgence and heavenly illumination. Through this love the world of being receives life. Through this love man is endowed with physical existence, until, through the breath of the Holy Spirit—this same love—he receives eternal life and becomes the image of the Living God. This love is the origin of all the love in the world of creation.

The second is the love that flows from man to God. This is faith, attraction to the Divine, enkindlement, progress, entrance into the Kingdom of God, receiving the Bounties of God, illumination with the lights of the Kingdom. This love is the origin of all philanthropy; this love causes the hearts of men to reflect the rays of the Sun of Reality.

The third is the love of God towards the Self or Identity of God. This is the transfiguration of His Beauty, the reflection of Himself in the mirror of His Creation. This is the reality of love, the Ancient Love, the Eternal Love. Through one ray of this Love all other love exists.

The fourth is the love of man for man. The love which exists between the hearts of believers is prompted by the ideal of the unity of spirits. This love is attained through the knowledge of God, so that men see the Divine Love reflected in the heart. Each sees in the other the Beauty of God reflected in the soul, and finding this point of similarity, they are attracted to one another in love. This love will make all men the waves of one sea, this love will make them all the stars of one heaven and the fruits of one tree. This love will bring the realization of true accord, the foundation of real unity.

The source for the above quotes:
Bahá'í Reference Library - Paris Talks, Pages 179-181

Sirona asked:

So, if you want to be “tolerant” yet don’t dare to live without the security of One God, One Faith, One Doctrine, you’re probably best advised to join the Baha’is. They sound progressive and they are one of the rare cases who successfully dodged the “anti-cult movement”, so, in the perception of the public, "No, they are not a cult”.

My reply:

There are what are called the three oneneses: The oneness of God ... The oneness of Religion and the oneness of man (humanity).
See
Baháʼí teachings - Wikipedia

 

[CG Didymus]

The fourth is the love of man for man. The love which exists between the hearts of believers is prompted by the ideal of the unity of spirits. This love is attained through the knowledge of God, so that men see the Divine Love reflected in the heart. Each sees in the other the Beauty of God reflected in the soul, and finding this point of similarity, they are attracted to one another in love. This love will make all men the waves of one sea, this love will make them all the stars of one heaven and the fruits of one tree. This love will bring the realization of true accord, the foundation of real unity.

You so rarely make an appearance on these kinds of threads. I'm glad you stopped by. So... would it be true that man has always had the capacity to have this level of love? If so... What has prevented man from being able to have this kind of love toward all people?

 

[arthra]

So... would it be true that man has always had the capacity to have this level of love? If so... What has prevented man from being able to have this kind of love toward all people?

Well my view is that the capacity to have "...love for all people" has always been there, but due to the limitations that were there from the past.... different languages, various cultural anomalies, primitive institutions that obtained the innate love was stifled. The concept of the oneness of humanity has along with it encouraging a universal auxiliary language, universal education, a world parliament and an international court of arbitration. Some of the prerequisites for these institutions are already on their way... We have a improved world communications and the United Nations programs which we did not have early in the twentieth century.

 

[Riders]

I'm taking a Baha"I study with a group of Baha"is. It is interesting. It's good study.But I take issue with their savior Bag u lah. He's a man just a man so to me just like Jesus he can't really save me only God can.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I'm taking a Baha"I study with a group of Baha"is. It is interesting. It's good study.But I take issue with their savior Bag u lah. He's a man just a man so to me just like Jesus he can't really save me only God can.

I wish for you all the best Riders.

Personally I see salvation is our choices, we choose to do the right thing, or we choose not to.

I see salvation does not come in doing deeds or having faith in hope for reward, nor for fear of punishment. I see our salvation lays in Love, submission to God to do the right thing, because we love all people, those that do good and those that do not so good.

Regards Tony

 

[Riders]

You never know I could be persuaded to join if it seemed right to me.However I am a Zen Buddhist as well no one will year me away from Buddhism ever.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I am aware of that. They developed on the background of Shi'ite Islam.



IMHO, I'd be careful with such a comparison, but this would lead off-topic.

On the reasons, why I stopped reading is that I found some Baha'i members on this forum continuously arguing like this:.

"It is evident that" ... "Obviously", "It is perfectly clear that " (God doesn't speak to everyone/wants us to worship him, so that's why God ...). Maybe arguing like this is some members' pelicularity, but if justifying the reason of the existence of one's religion already starts out with "It is evident that" ..., I expect the course of argumentation not to get any better. It is not at all evident that there is just one God. There can be many for example , or none.

I also can't accept the fact that God according to the Baha'i faith is unknowable but speaks to messengers who attribute qualities to him. Either, God is knowable or he is unknowable. If he is unknowable, nobody should be able to attribute qualities to him.

If a person realize the truth and reach a high enough level of wisdom, would think they can know God, but few reach that level today.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Nor may it hold for all Abrahamics. However, the trend is there.

You're correct. The view of God in Islamic mysticism is much the same as Hindu beliefs about Brahman (the ultimate and only true reality). The issue is that Hinduism is not a single religion and the views of Hindus are all over the place when it comes to theology, but Brahman is basically their concept of the Supreme Being.