Oneness of Humanity- Contradictions

Bahā’u’llāh:

“Contradiction has and will not ever have a way in the sanctified realm of the Divine Manifestations.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, p. 126.

Let us analyze

Is the Principle of Oneness of Humanity Novel?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: The Oneness of the World of Humanity is a special teaching of Bahā’u’llāh.

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 454.

`Abdu’l-Bahā: The Oneness of Humanity is not novel and was the basis of the teachings of the Divine Prophets.

“All divine prophets struggled for the Oneness of Humanity and served humanity. For the foundation of the divine teachings is the Oneness of Humanity. Moses served the Oneness of Humanity, Jesus established the Oneness of Humanity, Mohammad declared the Oneness of Humanity. The Bible, Torah, and Quran established the foundation of the Oneness of Humanity,”

Reference:`Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Egypt), vol. 1, pp. 18–19.

 

Are Black Africans Cows or Humans?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: All of humanity are members of the human species.

Reference: Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Tehran), vol. 2, pp. 145–146.

`Abdu’l-Bahā: Black Africans that have not been nurtured are cows that God has created with human faces.

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Tehran), vol. 3, p. 48.

 

Are Africans All Uncivilized, Wild Savages, and without Common-Sense?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: God created all humans from clay and did not put any differences. He created everyone the same and has put no differences in any grace or mercy.

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Payām-i malakūt, p. 42 (citing `Abdu’l-Bahā’).

`Abdu’l-Bahā: The inhabitants of a land like Africa are all like wild savages and land-dwelling animals that lack common-sense and knowledge.

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Tehran), vol. 3, p. 48.

 

Do Turks Deserve Ridiculous Answers?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: We are all divine sheep and no one has any superiority over another.

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb, vol. 3, p. 67.

`Abdu’l-Bahā: Turks deserve ridiculous answers.

Reference: Asad-Allāh Fāḍil Māzandarānī, Asrār al-āthār khuṣūṣī, vol. 3, p. 42–43.

 

Good Tree and Bad Tree?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: My father said there is no such thing as a good tree and a bad tree. He submerged everyone in the sea of divine generosity.

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 454.

Bahā’u’llāh: Deniers of Baha’ism are like bad trees that deserve to be burned!

Reference: `Abd a l-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 8, p. 39.

 

Socializing with Non-Baha’is!

Bahā’u’llāh: “Consort with all religions with amity and concord.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, The Kitābi Aqdas, p. 72.

`Abdu’l-Bahā: All humans must interact with each-other with utter affection.

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Payām-i malakūt, p. 44 (citing `Abdu’l-Bahā’).

Bahā’u’llāh: Don’t you dare socialize with deniers of Baha’ism and the unaware (who are basically all non-Baha’is).

“Do not socialize with those who deny God (meaning non-Baha’is) and his signs and keep away from their kind,”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 8, p. 39.

“It is incumbent on ever soul to keep away from the wicked breath of the polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism),”

Reference:`Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 8, p. 39.

“Know that God has forbidden his friends from meeting with the polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism) and hypocrites,”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 4, p. 280.

“It is not permitted to interact, speak, or meet with those individuals that have turned away and made their objections apparent. This is an order revealed from the heavens of an Ancient Commander,”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 8, p. 74.

“Run away from he who you do not find my love in his heart, keep away from him, and keep a great distance between you.,”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 2, p. 345 (sūrat al-aṣḥāb).

“Cleanse your eyes from [seeing] the deniers and the polytheists (meaning non-Baha’is) and turn away from them,”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 2, no. 81, p. 477.

“Break all ties with the polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism),”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, p. 90.

“O SON OF DUST! Beware! Walk not with the ungodly and seek not fellowship with him, for such companionship turneth the radiance of the heart into infernal fire,”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, The Hidden Words of Bahā’u’llāh, p. 42, no. 57.

 

Are Non-Baha’is Animals in the Presence of God?

Bahā’u’llāh: Non-Baha’is are animals in the presence of God.

“Today, according to the decree of the Point of Bayān (meaning the Bāb), those individuals who turn away from this Novel Affair (meaning Baha’ism) are deprived of the garb of being called and described [as humans?] and are assembled and mentioned as animals in the presence of God,”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, p. 213.

Bahā’u’llāh: Anyone who has any sense knows that everyone is equal in the presence of God.

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, p. 154.

 

Non-Baha’is Are Animals

`Abdu’l-Bahā: All of humanity are members of the human species. We should not consider ourselves greater than others, even those who are not believers.

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Tehran), vol. 2, pp. 145–146.

Bahā’u’llāh: Non-Baha’is are animals. Don’t even think about calling them humans!

“Today, according to the decree of the Point of Bayān (meaning the Bāb), those individuals who turn away from this Novel Affair (meaning Baha’ism) are deprived of the garb of being called and described [as humans?] and are assembled and mentioned as animals in the presence of God,”

“From this day, any individual that mentions as human a single person from those who deny me—whether that [denier] has a high or low stature—they will be excluded from all of (God’s) Merciful Graces, let alone trying to prove [those deniers] have dignity or stature,”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, p. 213 & 140

 

Non-Baha’is Are Worthless Pebbles and Baha’is Are Precious Jewels

Bahā’u’llāh: “You are all the fruits of one tree and the leaves of one branch.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, p. 265.

Bahā’u’llāh: “My friends are the pearls of [this] order and all others are earthly pebbles . . . a single one of these (Baha’is) is more precious than a million others (non-Baha’is).”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 4, pp. 353.

 

Does God’s Grace Apply to All Humans?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: God’s Grace applies to all humans even though some are ignorant and must be taught, some are unaware and should be awakened.

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Tehran), vol. 2, pp. 145–146.

Bahā’u’llāh: Whoever calls a single person of those that have not accepted Baha’ism a human will be deprived of God’s Grace.

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, p. 140.

 

Accompaniment or Banishment?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: If someone is separated, he should be returned and accompanied.

“Thus, the divine sheep must interact with each other with utter affection. If one wanders away they should return him and accompany him,”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Payām-i malakūt, p.44 (citing `Abdu’l-Bahā’).

Shoghi Effendi: No one is allowed to speak with those who have been shunned, even their family members.

“A question was asked about the friends that, as a result of their ignorance and neglect, had been excluded from administrative affairs about whether they should be invited to public assemblies or not? He (Shoghi) said, ‘Inviting them is not permitted.’ And it was asked about those that had been excluded from the community whether greeting and speaking with them was permitted? He replied, ‘If they have been spiritually excommunicated speaking with them is not permitted in any way,’”

Reference: Shoghi Effendi, Tauqī’āt Mubāraki (1945–1952), pp. 94–95.

 

Kindness or Torment?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: Be kind to any creature that has a soul.

“God the Exalted has put the crown of grace and beneficence on man’s head so that he shows kindness and affection to all things that possess a soul and to make apparent the greatness of the world of humanity,”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Tehran), vol. 8, p. 227.

Bahā’u’llāh: Be a certain torment for the disbelievers and non-Baha’is.

“And you, O friends of God, be clouds of grace for those who believe in God and his signs, and be certain torment for those who do not believe in God and are polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism),”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, p. 216.

 

Kindness or Beating?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: All are the creations of God and God is kind to all. So why should we be unkind?

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Tehran), vol. 2, pp. 145–146.

`Abdu’l-Bahā: My father (Bahā’u’llāh) told his companions to hit the kabob seller in the mouth because he merely said the Bābīs have come again.

“When his holiness returned from Sulaymaniyah, he was strolling in the street one day with the late Āqā Mīrzā Muḥammad Qulī. A Kabob seller quietly said, ‘These Bābīs have appeared again!’ The Blessed Beauty said to Mīrzā Muḥammad Qulī, ‘Hit him in the mouth!’ Mīrzā Muḥammad Qulī grabbed his beard and started hitting him in the head,”

Reference: Ḥabīb Mu’ayyad, Khāṭirāti Ḥabīb, vol. 1, p. 266.

To be continued…

Oneness of Humanity

Non-Baha’is Are Not Humans or Lack the Traits of Being Considered as Humans

According to Bahā’u’llāh, non-Baha’is are not humans and the consequence of mentioning them as ‘human’ is exclusion from all of God’s Graces:

“From this day, any individual that mentions as human a single person from those who deny me—whether that [denier] has a high or low stature—they will be excluded from all of (God’s) Merciful Graces, let alone trying to prove [those deniers] have dignity or stature.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, p. 140.

 

Non-Baha’is Are Animals

After calling non-Baha’is evil non-humans who have no dignity, he goes on to calling them animals that neither deserve the name nor the description of humanness:

“Today, according to the decree of the Point of Bayān (meaning the Bāb), those individuals who turn away from this Novel Affair (meaning Baha’ism) are deprived of the garb of being called and described [as humans?] and are assembled and mentioned as animals in the presence of God.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, p. 213.

“Do not see the polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism) but as earthworms and their sounds but the buzzing of flies.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 1, no. 20, p. 183.

“O group of polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism), if you take pride in your name remaining amongst the animals or being mentioned amongst the livestock, then take pride in that for you are worthy of it.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 2, no. 81, p. 452.

“Oh you donkeys! Whatever God says is the truth and will not become void by the words of the polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism).”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, p. 174.

“Encompassed as I am at this time by the dogs of the earth and the beasts of every land, concealed as I remain in the hidden habitation of Mine inner Being.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Gems of Divine Mysteries, p. 4.

“When the one who turned away from God halted (in accepting me) and fell off the path, in that moment his body left the garb of humanness and appeared and became visible in the skin of animals. Sanctified is He who changes the beings how he likes.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, p. 110.

 

Bahā’u’llāh Wishes Death on Non-Baha’is

“Die with anger, Oh he who denies this grace.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, p. 213.

“Die with anger O you denying polytheist (denier of Baha’ism).”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 1, no. 64, p. 276.

Ironically, these words are uttered by the same Bahā’u’llāh who advises his followers to not wish for others what they do not wish for themselves:

“He should not wish for others that which he doth not wish for himself.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahā’u’llāh, p. 266.

 

Baha’is are Precious Jewels and Non-Baha’is are Worthless Pebbles

Bahā’u’llāh says:

“My friends are the pearls of [this] order and all others are earthly pebbles . . . a single one of these (Baha’is) is more precious than a million others (non-Baha’is).”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 4, p. 353.

 

Non-Baha’is Must Be Tormented

Without specifying the form and method of torment, whether it be physical or spiritual,

Bahā’u’llāh says:

“And you, oh friends of God, be clouds of grace for those who believe in God and his signs, and be certain torment for those who do not believe in God and are polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism).”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, p. 216.

“Be like a flame of fire to my enemies and a river of eternal life to my friends.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Ad`iyyih-i ḥaḍrat-i maḥbūb (Egypt: Published by Faraj-Allāh Dhakī al-Kurdī, 1339 AH), p. 184.

“God has made him (Bahā’u’llāh) a light for the monotheists (Baha’is) and a fire for the polytheists (non-Baha’is).”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 2, no. 74, p. 372.

“God will soon take out from the sleeves of power the hands of strength and dominance and will make the Servant (Bahā’u’llāh) victorious and will cleanse the earth from the filth of every rejected polytheist (deniers of Baha’ism). And they will stand by the cause and will conquer the lands using my mighty eternal name and will enter the lands and they will be feared by all the servants.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 2, no. 90, p. 587.

Once the Baha’i kingdom materializes the earth will be cleansed from the filth of all non-Baha’is. The words used (like being feared by the servants) clearly show that cleansing does not mean converting them to Baha’ism. Furthermore, it is obvious that not all people are willing to convert to a new religion. So much for Oneness of Humanity!

 

Non-Baha’is Are Bastards That Will Go to Hell

“The polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism) will have no residence but the hellfire.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 1, no. 97, p. 339.

“Whoever denies this Apparent Exalted Luminous Grace (meaning Baha’ism), it is worthy that he asks his state from his mother and he will soon be returned to the bottom of hell.”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 4, p. 355 and `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Ganj-i shāygān (n.p.: Mu’assisiyi Millī Maṭbū`āt Amrī, 124 B.), p. 78.

The phrase “asks his state from his mother” is used in Persian to imply that someone is a bastard. Bahā’u’llāh doesn’t stop there. He even goes on to say who fathered some of his deniers:

“Whoever has the enmity of this servant (meaning Bahā’u’llāh) in his heart, certainly Satan has entered his mother’s bed.”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Ganj-i shāygān, p. 79.

If according to Bahā’u’llāh those who deny him or are his enemies are bastards then:

1. His brother, Mīrzā Yaḥyā Ṣubḥ Azal, who denied him, was a bastard.

2. His sister, `Izziye Khānum (Khānum Buzurg), who also denied him, was a bastard.

3. The wives of Bahā’u’llāh’s father were cheating on him.

4. All Jews, Christians, Muslims, and all other people that deny him are bastards.

 

Non-Baha’is and the enemies of the Baha’i creed:

`Abdu’l-Bahā quotes these words from his father regarding non-Baha’is and the enemies of the Baha’i creed:

“He asked, “Where are Heaven and Hell”? Say, the former is meeting me and the latter is yourself, O you doubting polytheist.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 1, no. 40, p. 228.

“Say, O my friend and my pure ones! Listen to the Voice of this Beloved Prisoner in this Great Prison. If you detect in any man the least perceptible breath of violation, shun him and keep away from him.” Then He says: “Verily, they are manifestations of Satan.”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Bahā’ī World Faith—Selected Writings of Bahā’u’llāh and `Abdu’l-Bahā (`Abdu’l-Bahā’s Section Only), p. 431.

 

Non-Baha’is Have No Knowledge or Reason

“Oh you donkeys! Whatever God says is the truth and will not become void by the words of the polytheists.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, p. 174.

“Oh followers of Bahā . . . let these bogus dung-beetle like bodies to be occupied with their filthy dirty stinky beliefs. By my true self, the nose of the cow has no share from this purified perfume.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Iqtidārāt wa chand lauḥ dīgar, p. 58.

Have in mind that that this degree of politeness emanates from the same Bahā’u’llāh that says:

“Politeness is one of mankind’s traits that distinguishes him from other [creatures]. He who has no success in [being polite] then his demise certainly has—and will have—priority over his existence.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, p. 203–204.

Isn’t this clear contradiction?

 

Treatment of the Covenant Breakers

In Baha’ism, a very harsh and tormenting punishment exists for those Baha’is that act against the decrees and teachings or orders of the Universal House of Justice. These individuals are labeled as covenant breakers. Their punishment is referred to as ṭard, meaning excommunication, shunning, or banishment. All of Bahā’u’llāh’s descendants have been shunned by Shoghi and `Abdu’l-Bahā and not a single Baha’i exists today that is related by blood to Bahā’u’llāh.

`Abdu’l-Bahā gave the following order:

The Hands of the Cause of God must be ever watchful and so soon as they find anyone beginning to oppose and protest against the Guardian of the Cause of God, cast him out from the congregation of the people of Bahā and in no wise accept any excuse from him. How often hath grievous error been disguised in the garb of truth, that it might sow the seeds of doubt in the hearts of men!

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, The Will and Testament of `Abdu’l-Bahā, p. 12.

Baha’is are ordered to deal with covenant breakers in the same way one deals with someone afflicted with a plague; such that the closest people to them, even their father, mother, children, and spouse, are strictly prohibited from speaking or having any contact with them.

Why Have the Baha’is Created a New Calendar?

After all the preaching for the Oneness of Humanity, why have the Baha’is created a new calendar and created further divisions in a world they are apparently trying to unite?

The Baha’i calendar is defined like this:

The Bahā’ī year consists of 19 months of 19 days each (i.e. 361 days), with the addition of certain “Intercalary Days” (four in ordinary and five in leap years) between the eighteenth and nineteenth months in order to adjust the calendar to the solar year. The Bāb named the months after the attributes of God. The Bahā’ī New Year, like the ancient Persian New Year, is astronomically fixed, commencing at the March equinox (usually March 21), and the Bahā’ī era commences with the year of the Bāb’s declaration (i.e. 1844 A.D., 1260 A.H.) . . . It seems, therefore, fitting that the new age of unity should have a new calendar free from the objections and associations which make each of the older calendar unacceptable to large sections of the world’s population, and it is difficult to see how any other arrangement could exceed in simplicity and convenience that proposed by the Bāb.

Reference: J. E. Esslemont, Bahā’u’llāh and the New Era, pp. 178–179.

What advantage does this have over the Persian or Gregorian calendar? Or what problems or miseries did the adherents of the two aforementioned calendars have met that required a new “simple” and “convenient” calendar to be proposed. We will leave it to the readers to judge the justification and rationality behind this calendar, and see for themselves why the same flaws and objections attributed to non-Baha’i calendars are equally applicable to the Baha’i system.

Did the Founders of Baha’ism Believe in the Oneness of Humanity?

Baha’i scripture is replete with violations of this principle. These violations are sometimes so blatant that one reaches the conclusion that this principle should be referred to as the ‘noneness’ of humanity.

Black Africans are All Like Wild Savages and Land Dwelling Animals:

`Abdu’l-Bahā had quite an interesting view about black Africans.

“The inhabitants of a land like Africa are all like wild savages and land-dwelling animals that lack common-sense and knowledge and are all wild. There is not a single wise and civilized person among them.”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Egypt), vol. 1, p. 331.

“The wild tribes have no superiority over animals. For example, what is the difference between African blacks and American blacks? The [black Africans] are cows that God has created with human faces. The [black Americans] are civilized, intelligent, and have culture. In this trip to the black centers, schools, and churches in Washington there were extensive talks with the blacks, and they understood all the points like the intelligent people in Europe. So what difference is there between these two types of blacks other than nurture, with one in utter ignorance and the other in the peak of civilization?”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Tehran), vol. 3, p. 48.

 

Abdu’l-Bahā’s Opinion About Turks

When Djemal Pasha (One of the most important leaders of the Ottoman government between 1908–1918.) . . . reached Acre and asked to see me, I mounted a donkey and headed for his home. As soon as he saw me, he greeted me and sat me next to himself and without hesitation said, “You are a corrupter of religion and that is why the government of Iran exiled you here . . .” I thought to myself that he is a Turk and I must give him a ridiculous and silencing answer.

Reference: Asad-Allāh Fāḍil Māzandarānī, Asrār al-āthār khuṣūṣī (n.p.: Mu’assisiyi Millī Maṭbū`āt Amrī, 124 B.), vol. 3, pp. 42–43.

 

Non-Baha’is Are like Dry Trees That Are Only Worthy of Fire

“Anyone who has a garden will not allow the dry trees to remain in the garden and will definitely cut them and throw them in fire, for dry wood is only worthy of fire. Thus, O inhabitants of my orchard, protect yourselves from the wicked poisonous breath and void breeze which is socializing with the polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism) and the unaware (ghāfil).”

Reference: Abd a l-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī (Tehran: Mu’assisiyi Millī Maṭbū`āt Amrī, 129 B.), vol. 8, p. 39.

“Do not socialize with those who deny God (This sentence is referring to those who deny Bahā’u’llāh, because he had on many occasions referred to himself as God) and his signs and keep away from their kind.”

“It is incumbent on ever soul to keep away from the wicked breath of the polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism).”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 8, p. 39.

“Know that God has forbidden his friends from meeting with the polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism) and hypocrites.”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 4, p. 280.

“It is not permitted to interact, speak, or meet with those individuals that have turned away and made their objections apparent. This is an order revealed from the heavens of an Ancient Commander.”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 8, p. 74.

“Run away from he who you do not find my love in his heart, keep away from him, and keep a great distance between you.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 2, p. 345 (sūrat al-aṣḥāb).

“Cleanse your eyes from [seeing] the deniers and the polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism) and turn away from them.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 2, no. 81, p. 477.

“Break all ties with the polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism).”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, p. 90.

“O SON OF DUST! Beware! Walk not with the ungodly and seek not fellowship with him, for such companionship turneth the radiance of the heart into infernal fire.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, The Hidden Words of Bahā’u’llāh, p. 42, no. 57.

The Oneness of Humanity

“The second principle is the Oneness of Humanity: all humans are divine sheep and God is the kind shepherd who has utter compassion towards all the sheep and has made no distinction [between them].”

Reference:`Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Egypt), vol. 3, p. 67.

Bahā’u’llāh says:
Oh friends! Know that the curtain of unity has been raised, do not look at each other as strangers; you are all the fruits of one tree and the leaves of one branch.

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, p. 265.

According to Shoghi Effendi, the central axis of all Baha’i principles, and the ultimate goal of Baha’ism is the “Oneness of Humanity.”

“The principle of Oneness of Humanity is the axis of all of Bahā’u’llāh’s teachings” and “The Oneness of Humanity is the main and ultimate goal of Bahā’u’llāh’s creed,”

Reference: Hūshmand Fatḥ A`ẓam, Naẓm jahānī Bahā’ī muntakhabātī az āthār ṣādiri az qalam ḥaḍrat walī amr Allāh, 2nd ed. (Dundas [Canada]: n.p., 151 B. [1955]), pp. 49 and 57–58.

“This means that Bahā’u’llāh declared the Oneness of Humanity so all members of humanity become brothers, sisters, daughters, mothers, sons, and fathers of each other.”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Egypt), vol. 1, p. 154.

The following questions should be kept in mind while analyzing this principle:

1. What is the explicit meaning of the ‘Oneness of Humanity’? Does the Oneness of Humanity mean that people of all races and religions should become sisters, brothers, and friends or does it mean everyone should convert to Baha’ism?

2. If the former definition applies and everyone—regardless of religion or creed—should live in peace and harmony, then why do Baha’i orders imply the contrary (as we will soon show)?

3. If the meaning of the ‘Oneness of Humanity’ is that all people must become Baha’is, then who will be responsible for administrating the political matters of this unified Baha’i society, given that under Baha’i law, no Baha’i is allowed to interfere in political matters, either in words or in action?

4. Do Baha’is have a particular plan for reaching the ‘Oneness of Humanity’ or is this merely a theoretical slogan?

In further blogs we will analyze if the principle of ‘Oneness of Humanity’ was followed by the founders of this faith.

A Summary and Conclusion

1) Is “Religion Must be the Source of Unity and Fellowship” a new principle?

All of God’s Prophets made effort to mend conflicts among humanity and cause unity and fellowship among them. Examples from Zoroastrianism, Christianity, and Islam were brought forth. `Abdu’l-Bahā also confessed that this principle has existed in all religions. It is obvious that this principle is not a new discovery made by the Baha’is.

2) Did the leaders of Baha’ism act upon this principle?

According to the sayings of `Abdu’l-Bahā, if a religion causes war and enmity, its inexistence is better than its existence. The history of Bābism and Baha’ism displays a great deal of bloodshed and conflicts between the followers of these groups and those that opposed them. These conflicts even existed between Baha’i leaders in a bid to become successors to their predecessors.

3) Is this principle rational and logical?

Throughout history, many ignorant people have stood up against God’s prophets and have opposed them. These oppositions resulted in wars and conflicts. Can we say that because these religions brought about war, it would have been fundamentally better for these Prophets not to have come altogether?

Contradictions

Bahā’u’llāh:
“Contradiction has and will not ever have a way in the sanctified realm of the Divine Manifestations.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, p. 126.

Is the Principle “Religion Must Be the Source of Unity and Fellowship in the World” New?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: This is a new principle brought forth by my father.

“He sets forth a new principle for this day in the announcement that religion must be the cause of unity, harmony and agreement among mankind. If it is the cause of discord and hostility, if it leads to separation and creates conflict, the absence of religion would be preferable in the world,”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 454–455.

`Abdu’l-Bahā: All prophets came to create love and kindness among the people.

“All the Prophets came to nurture the people so that the immature individuals could reach maturity and to bring about kindness and love among the people, not hatred and enmity,”

Reference:`Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Payām-i malakūt, p. 65.

 

Is Bābism a Religion?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: If religion causes enmity and war, it is not a religion.

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Payām-i malakūt, pp. 44–45.

Ponder on: The conflicts among the Bābīs over the title of Him Whom God Shall Make Manifest.

Twenty seven people among the Bābīs brought themselves forth as the Promised One in the Book of Bayān, such as Mīrzā Yaḥyā Ṣubḥ Azal, Mīrzā Ḥusayn `Alī Nūrī (Bahā’u’llāh), Mīrzā Asad-Allāh Dayyān, Mīrzā Muḥammad Nabīl Zarandī, Mīrzā Ghughā Darwīsh, and Sayyid Baṣīr Hindī.

Reference: Muḥammad `Alī Fayḍī, Ḥaḍrat Bahā’u’llāh, pp. 103–104.

The massacres and bloody wars that were started on the Bab’s orders in three different parts of Iran.

Reference: Nabīl Zarandī, The Dawn-Breakers: Nabīl’s Narrative of the Early Days of the Bahā’ī Revelation, chapters XIX, XXII, XIV.

The Bab’s orders to behead and massacre those who did not believe in him.

“The utterance of the [book or religion] of Bayān in the day of the appearance of his Highness A`lā (meaning the Bāb) was to behead, burn the books, destroy the monuments, and massacre [everyone] but those who believed [in the Bāb’s religion] and verified it,”

Reference:`Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Egypt: 1330 AH), vol. 2, p. 266

“The unbelievers and the faithless have set their minds on four things: first, the shedding of blood [beheading]; second, the burning of books; third, the shunning of the followers of other religions; fourth, the extermination of other communities and groups. Now however, through the strengthening grace and potency of the Word of God these four barriers have been demolished, these clear injunctions have been obliterated from the Tablet and brutal dispositions have been transmuted into spiritual attributes.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Tablets of Bahā’u’llāh Revealed After the Kitāb-i-Aqdas, p. 91.

 

Were the Bābī Wars Solely Defensive?

Baha’i History books: The Bāb’s followers were a peaceful oppressed people who only defended their women and children against the evil Persians.

“That humiliating episode was soon followed by a number of similar attempts on the part of the supporters of the governor, all of which utterly failed to achieve their purpose. Every time they rushed to attack the fort, Hujjat would order a few of his companions, who were three thousand in number, to emerge from their retreat and scatter their forces. He never failed, every time he gave them such orders, to caution his fellow-disciples against shedding unnecessarily the blood of their assailants. He constantly reminded them that their action was of a purely defensive character, and that their sole purpose was to preserve inviolate the security of their women and children. “We are commanded,” he was frequently heard to observe, “not to wage holy war under any circumstances against the unbelievers, whatever be their attitude towards us,”

Reference: Nabīl Zarandī, The Dawn-Breakers: Nabīl’s Narrative of the Early Days of the Bahā’ī Revelation, p. 546.

Bahā’u’llāh and `Abdul’-Bahā: The Bāb gave the order to massacre and behead all non-Bābīs.

“The utterance of the [book or religion] of Bayān in the day of the appearance of his Highness A`lā (meaning the Bāb) was to behead, burn the books, destroy the monuments, and massacre [everyone] but those who believed [in the Bāb’s religion] and verified it,”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Egypt: 1330 AH), vol. 2, p. 266.

“The unbelievers and the faithless have set their minds on four things: first, the shedding of blood [beheading]; second, the burning of books; third, the shunning of the followers of other religions; fourth, the extermination of other communities and groups. Now however, through the strengthening grace and potency of the Word of God these four barriers have been demolished, these clear injunctions have been obliterated from the Tablet and brutal dispositions have been transmuted into spiritual attributes.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Tablets of Bahā’u’llāh Revealed After the Kitāb-i-Aqdas, p. 91.

 

Is Baha’ism a Religion?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: If a religion causes divisions it is not a religion.

“Religion should create unity and create links between the hearts. Jesus and the other divine prophets came to create unity and fellowship. If religion causes divisions, its non-existence is preferred.,”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Payām-i malakūt, p. 59.

Ponder On: The conflicts between Bahā’u’llāh and his brother Mīrzā Yaḥyā.

The conflicts, feuds, and bloodshed between Bahā’u’llāh and his brother Mīrzā Yaḥyā Ṣubḥ Azal and their followers resulted in the exile of the Azalīs (the supporters of Mīrzā Yaḥyā Ṣubḥ Azal) to Cyprus and the Baha’is to Palestine.

The conflicts between `Abdu’l-Bahā and his brother Muḥammad `Alī.

Bahā’u’llāh had willed that his successor would be Ghuṣn A`ẓam (`Abdu’l-Bahā’) and after him Ghuṣn Akbar (`Abdu’l-Bahā’s brother Muḥammad `Alī): “God has destined the station [for] Ghuṣn Akbar after his position (meaning `Abdu’l-Bahā’), for He is the Commanding Wise. We chose the Akbar after the A`ẓam, an order from the All Knowing and Aware (God). All must show kindness towards the two Ghuṣns . . . All must respect and admire the two Ghuṣns,”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, pp. 302–303.

After Bahā’u’llāh’s death the two brothers differed on the amount of authority they had and fights ensued between them and their followers.

The disputes between Shoghi and those who opposed his successorship.

According to Bahā’u’llāh’s orders the successor after `Abdu’l-Bahā was supposed to be his brother Ghuṣn Akbar. `Abdu’l-Bahā disobeyed this decree and instead appointed his own grandson Shoghi Effendi as his successor. This resulted in many differences and conflicts between Shoghi and many Baha’is who didn’t accept his authority.

The dispute between Rūḥiyyih Maxwell and Mason Remey.

In contrast to what `Abdu’l-Bahā had prophesized, Shoghi was sterile and had no children to succeed him. In a bid to become his successor, an internal conflict erupted between Bahā’u’llāh’s followers. Amongst these conflicts, the most intense was the one between Shoghi’s widow (Rūḥiyyih Maxwell) and Mason Remey (President of the International Baha’i Council). Mason Remey claimed that the UHJ established by Rūḥiyyih Maxwell was illegitimate and in a countermove the UHJ excommunicated Mason Remey from the Baha’i community.

 

Is Baha’ism the Cause of Hatred and Having No Religion Is Better than Being a Baha’i?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: If religion causes enmity and hatred it is not a religion.

“Religion must be the cause of unity and fellowship. If religion causes enmity it will have no result and having no religion is better. For it becomes the cause of enmity and hatred between humanity and whatever causes enmity is hated by God and whatever causes unity and fellowship is accepted and praised. If religion causes killing and savagery it is not religion and having no religion is better than that. For religion is meant to be a cure. If a cure causes sickness then of course, no cure is better than it. Thus, if religion causes war and slaughter, then of course, it is better to have no religion,”

Reference:`Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Payām-i malakūt, pp. 44–45.

Bahā’u’llāh: When I claimed to be He Whom God Shall make Manifest, such hatred and envy occurred that had never existed to such a degree from the beginning of creation and never will occur again.

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, The Kitāb-i-Īqān, p. 249.

I want to incite the fire of hatred in the chest of non-Baha’is.

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 1, no. 97, p. 339.

 

Are Other Peoples’ Beliefs Any of Our Business?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: Other people’s beliefs are none of our business. Issues of faith are relevant to God and he will handle them on the Day of Judgment. God has not made us the police of the peoples’ actions.

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Tehran), vol. 2, pp. 284–285.

Bahā’u’llāh: Torment the deniers of Baha’ism.

“And you, oh friends of God, be clouds of grace for those who believe in God and his signs, and be certain torment for those who do not believe in God and are polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism),”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, p. 216.

 

Befriending the Enemies or Being like Flame of Fire to Them?

Bahā’u’llāh: “If, God forbid, you have an enemy, do not see him as an enemy but rather a friend. Deal with your friends in the same way you deal with your enemy.”

Reference: Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Egypt), vol. 1, p. 154.

Bahā’u’llāh: “Be like a flame of fire to my enemies and a river of eternal life to my friends.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Ad`iyyih-i ḥaḍrat-i maḥbūb (Egypt: Published by Faraj-Allāh Dhakī al-Kurdī, 1339 AH), p .184.

 

Kindness or Violence?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: When everyone was in utmost hatred and spite, Bahā’u’llāh invited the word to kindness and fellowship and brought about unity and agreement.

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Tehran), vol. 2, p. 54.

Bahā’u’llāh’s Sister: Bahā’u’llāh and his followers murdered many people in Baghdad.

Reference: `Izziye Khānum (Khānum Buzurg), Tanbīh al-nā’imīn, pp. 11–12.

 

Is Religion a Cause of Fellowship or Fear?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: Religion must be a cause of fellowship. It must cause kindness. It must cause links among humanity.

“The third principle of his highness Bahā’u’llāh is that religion must be the source of fellowship. It must cause links among humanity,”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Tehran), vol. 2, p. 146.

`Abdu’l-Bahā: In Iraq, Bahā’u’llāh had caused such fear in the heart of the Muslims, that not a single person dared to protest against him.

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Egypt), vol. 2, p. 177.

Bahā’u’llāh: Once my followers conquer the lands they will cleanse them from non-Baha’is and everyone will fear them!

“God will soon take out from the sleeves of power the hands of strength and dominance and will make the Servant (Bahā’u’llāh) victorious and will cleanse the earth from the filth of every rejected polytheist (deniers of Baha’ism). And they will stand by the cause and will conquer the lands using my mighty eternal name and will enter the lands and they will be feared by all the servants,”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Āthār-i Qalam-i A`lā, vol. 2, no. 90, p. 587.

Courtesy: Twelve Principles – A Comprehensive Investigation on the Bahai Teachings

Conflicts During Bahā’u’llāh’s Era

After Bahā’u’llāh put forth his claim of being the Bab’s successor, he claimed the title of Him Whom God Shall Make Manifest and attracted a number of followers, disagreements arose between him and his brother Ṣubḥ Azal, and their respective followers clashed and shed blood.

Bahā’u’llāh was forced to flee Baghdad and take refuge in the mountains of Sulaymaniyah near Mosul to escape his brother’s followers. Under the alias Dervish Mohammad, he lived with the lifestyle of a dervish there for two years. Bahā’u’llāh uttered the following statements about this journey:

“By the Righteousness of God! Our withdrawal contemplated no return, and Our separation hoped for no reunion. The one object of Our retirement was to avoid becoming a subject of discord among the faithful, a source of disturbance unto Our companions, the means of injury to any soul, or the cause of sorrow to any heart. Beyond these, We cherished no other intention, and apart from them, We had no end in view.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, The Kitāb-i-Īqān (US Bahā’ī Publishing Trust, 1989 [pocket-size edition]), p. 251.

Bahā’u’llāh confesses that the proclamation of his authority had caused conflict among his friends and followers of his creed. Thus, he had no choice but to go into hiding to prevent this and for two years there was no news of him or his claims. Some might claim that these actions were justified and in accordance with the principle that is under consideration, for Bahā’u’llāh, in order to prevent hatred and enmity, refrained from preaching his religion altogether.

This argument is unacceptable, for, even though Bahā’u’llāh himself knew that proclaiming his authority would cause conflicts among his followers, he still returned after two years, even though he had said “Our withdrawal contemplated no return, and Our separation hoped for no reunion.” Why did he once again put forth his claims of being the successor to the Bab and claimant to the title of Him Whom God Shall Make Manifest? Why did he engage in conflicts and quarrels with his brother, until the situation reached the point that they exchanged all sorts of profanities? Didn’t Bahā’u’llāh himself not admit that

“In these days, however, such odours of jealousy are diffused, that—I swear by the Educator of all beings, visible and invisible—from the beginning of the foundation of the world—though it hath no beginning—until the present day, such malice, envy, and hate have in no wise appeared, nor will they ever be witnessed in the future. For a number of people who have never inhaled the fragrance of justice, have raised the standard of sedition, and have leagued themselves against Us. On every side We witness the menace of their spears, and in all directions We recognize the shafts of their arrows.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, The Kitāb-i-Īqān, p. 249.

According to Bahā’u’llāh’s own statements, his claims—instead of bringing about unity and fellowship—brought about such a degree of hatred and jealousy that was unprecedented and will never occur again. Thus according to Bahā’u’llāh and Abdu’l-Bahā that, “if religion is a cause of enmity and a cause of war, its absence is better, and a lack of religion is better than religion,” it is obvious that having no religion is better than being a Baha’i.

Clashes After Bahā’u’llāh’s Death

If we analyze the issues of fellowship and hatred among Baha’i’s, we will see that even among the followers of Bahā’u’llāh there were many instances where there was no peace or love.

After Bahā’u’llāh’s death, disputes arose among his children over the succession of their father. Even though he had ordered them to refrain from conflicts and disagreements, to respect each other and the other family members, and to refrain from saying obscenities to one another, his sons became engrossed in conflicts and accusations.

It is natural for normal people to have differences amongst each other after someone’s death. What is difficult to understand is why should differences arise amongst individuals that preach the slogan of the Oneness of Humanity and those that claim they possess divine stations.

If religion must be a cause of fellowship and unity, then why did `Abdu’l-Bahā refer to his brother with rude and impolite words like calf, dung beetle, the Devil, and Satan?

“When Mīrzā Yaḥyā Azal started opposing the works, deeds, and words of his esteemed brother (Bahā’u’llāh) in Edirne . . . he plunged from his [high] stature and the rank of union and agreement [that he had with Bahā’u’llāh] and was gradually— in the tablets, works, and revelations [from Bahā’u’llāh]— referred to with codes, references, and names such as the polytheist, the calf, the scarab (dung beetle), the tyrant, the Satan, the devil, the foul swamp, the buzzing of a fly, and similar names,”

Reference: Asad-Allāh Fāḍil Māzandarānī, Asrār al-āthār khuṣūṣī, vol. 5, p. 345–346.

 

Baha’i Attitude Toward Non-Baha’is

“We must avoid deniers in all affairs and must not become fond of them or sit and converse with them even for a moment, for by God the [effect of] evil individuals on pure individuals is like fire on dry wood and heat on cold snow,”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 8, pp. 39

“Know that God has forbidden his friends from meeting with the polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism) and hypocrites.”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 4, p. 280.

“And you, oh friends of God, be clouds of grace for those who believe in God and his signs, and be certain torment for those who do not believe in God and are polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism).”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, p. 216.

And finally, why do Baha’is treat covenant breakers in such a harsh manner?

Courtesy: Twelve Principles – A Comprehensive Investigation on the Bahai Teachings

Did the Founders of Baha’ism Act Upon These Principles?

According to this principle and the aforementioned statements from `Abdu’l-Bahā, if a religion causes enmity and hatred, its non-existence is better than its existence. Thus, it logically follows that if Bābism and Baha’ism caused enmity and hatred, they are subject to `Abdu’l-Bahā’s decree and their non-existence is preferred over their existence.

We will now proceed to show the many instances in which the Bābī and Baha’i creeds became a cause of enmity, hatred, and divisions.

Internal Disputes in the Bābī and Baha’i creeds

The history of Bābism and Baha’ism is filled with various enmities and conflicts between their leaders and followers. Much can be said about each conflict, but we will only refer to a small number of them below:

  1. The conflicts among the Bābīs over the title of Him Whom God Shall Make Manifest.

Twenty seven people among the Bābīs brought themselves forth as the Promised One in the Book of Bayān, such as Mīrzā Yaḥyā Ṣubḥ Azal, Mīrzā Ḥusayn `Alī Nūrī (Bahā’u’llāh), Mīrzā Asad-Allāh Dayyān, Mīrzā Muḥammad Nabīl Zarandī, Mīrzā Ghughā Darwīsh, and Sayyid Baṣīr Hindī.

See Muḥammad `Alī Fayḍī, Ḥaḍrat Bahā’u’llāh, pp. 103–104.

2. The conflicts, feuds, and bloodshed between Bahā’u’llāh and his brother Mīrzā Yaḥyā Ṣubḥ Azal and their followers that resulted in the exile of the Azalīs (the supporters of Mīrzā Yaḥyā Ṣubḥ Azal) to Cyprus and the Baha’is to Palestine.

3. The conflicts and clashes between `Abdu’l-Bahā and his brother Muḥammad `Alī Effendi.

Bahā’u’llāh had willed that his successor would be Ghuṣn A`ẓam (`Abdu’l-Bahā’) and after him Ghuṣn Akbar (`Abdu’l-Bahā’s brother Muḥammad `Alī): “God has destined the station [for] Ghuṣn Akbar after his position (meaning `Abdu’l-Bahā’), for He is the Commanding Wise. We chose the Akbar after the A`ẓam, an order from the All Knowing and Aware (God). All must show kindness towards the two Ghuṣns . . . All must respect and admire the two Ghuṣns,”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`iy-i alwāḥ-i mubārak-ih, pp. 302–303.

After Bahā’u’llāh’s death the two brothers differed on the amount of authority they had and fights ensued between them and their followers.

4. The disputes and arguments between Shoghi and those who opposed his successorship.

According to Bahā’u’llāh’s orders the successor after `Abdu’l-Bahā was supposed to be his brother Ghuṣn Akbar. `Abdu’l-Bahā disobeyed this decree and instead appointed his own grandson Shoghi Effendi as his successor. This resulted in many differences and conflicts between Shoghi and many Baha’is who didn’t accept his authority.

5. The dispute between Rūḥiyyih Maxwell (Shoghi’s widow) and the Hands of the Cause with Mason Remey, the then president of the International Baha’i Council.

In contrast to what `Abdu’l-Bahā had prophesized, Shoghi was sterile and had no children to succeed him. In a bid to become his successor, an internal conflict erupted between Bahā’u’llāh’s followers. Amongst these conflicts, the most intense was the one between Shoghi’s widow (Rūḥiyyih Maxwell) and Mason Remey (President of the International Baha’i Council). Mason Remey claimed that the UHJ established by Rūḥiyyih Maxwell was illegitimate and in a countermove the UHJ excommunicated Mason Remey from the Baha’i community.

 

Wars During the Bāb’s Era

When the Bāb was imprisoned in Chihrīq, Muḥammad Shah of Qājār passed away and the princes and nobles of the court became preoccupied with the issues of succession. This put the country in a state of chaos and turmoil. The Bābīs took advantage of this situation and began to riot under the orders of the Bāb. These riots eventually lead to three bloody wars in three different regions of Persia.

The first war began in the first days of the reign of Nāṣir al-Dīn Shāh in the Fort of Sheikh Ṭabarsī in Māzandarān and was led by Mullā Ḥusayn-i-Bushrū’ī and after his death by Mīrzā `Alī Bārfurūshī. These clashes have been described in detail in The Dawn Breakers:

“The day had not yet broken when at the signal, “Mount your steeds, O heroes (The original Farsi word used is jangjoo which means ‘combatant’ not ‘hero’.) of God!” . . . Mullā Ḥusayn and two hundred and two of his companions ran to their horses and followed Quddūs . . . He forced his way through the gate and rushed into the private apartments of the prince.”

Reference: Nabīl Zarandī, The Dawn-Breakers: Nabīl’s Narrative of the Early Days of the Bahā’ī Revelation (US Bahā’ī Publishing Trust, 1932), p. 365.

“Mullā Ḥusayn . . . mounting his charger, gave the signal that the gate of the fort be opened. As he rode out at the head of three hundred and thirteen of his companions to meet the enemy, the cry of “Yā Sāhibu’z-Zamān!” again broke forth. Mullā Ḥusayn first charged the barricade which was defended by Zakariyyay-i-Qādī-Kalā’ī, one of the enemy’s most valiant officers. Within a short space of time, he had broken through that barrier, disposed of its commander, and scattered his men. Dashing forward with the same swiftness and intrepidity, he overcame the resistance of both the second and third barricades, diffusing, as he advanced, despair and consternation among his foes. Undeterred by the bullets which rained continually upon him and his companions, they pressed forward until the remaining barricades had all been captured and overthrown.”

Reference: Nabīl Zarandī, The Dawn-Breakers: Nabīl’s Narrative of the Early Days of the Bahā’ī Revelation, p. 379–380.

The second clash occurred in the city of Nayrīz with the uprising of Sayyid Yaḥyā Dārābī and this clash also left behind a large number of casualties.

Reference: Nabīl Zarandī, The Dawn-Breakers: Nabīl’s Narrative of the Early Days of the Bahā’ī Revelation, pp. 465–500.

The third clash occurred in Zanjān between the Bābīs and the government forces. The casualties in this conflict were at least 1800 from the Bābī side:

“I have heard it stated that one of the companions of Hujjat who undertook to record the names of those who had suffered martyrdom, had left a written statement in which he had computed the number of those who had fallen prior to the death of Hujjat to be a thousand, five hundred and ninety-eight, whilst those who had suffered martyrdom afterwards were thought to have been in all two hundred and two persons.”

Reference: Nabīl Zarandī, The Dawn-Breakers: Nabīl’s Narrative of the Early Days of the Bahā’ī Revelation, p. 580.

Was the cause of these wars and massacres, anything other than the religion of the Bāb and the beliefs of a group of Bābīs? Did these individuals not cause their own destruction, as well as that of many others, because they rioted and fought for their faith and the love they had for the Bāb?

Bābism, which is the root of Baha’ism, openly ordered its followers to start wars and cause bloodshed. In contrary to what Baha’is claim in their history books and want non-Baha’is to believe, the Bābīs were not a group of oppressed and peace-loving people who were merely protecting their women and children from the Persian government:

That humiliating episode was soon followed by a number of similar attempts on the part of the supporters of the governor, all of which utterly failed to achieve their purpose. Every time they rushed to attack the fort, Hujjat would order a few of his companions, who were three thousand in number, to emerge from their retreat and scatter their forces. He never failed, every time he gave them such orders, to caution his fellow-disciples against shedding unnecessarily the blood of their assailants. He constantly reminded them that their action was of a purely defensive character, and that their sole purpose was to preserve inviolate the security of their women and children. “We are commanded,” he was frequently heard to observe, “not to wage holy war under any circumstances against the unbelievers, whatever be their attitude towards us.”

Reference: Nabīl Zarandī, The Dawn-Breakers: Nabīl’s Narrative of the Early Days of the Bahā’ī Revelation, p. 546.

The peaceful and oppressed face of the Bābis and Baha’is, as well as the historical narratives presented in the books authored by Nabīl Zarandī (many of which were later used by Shoghi Effendi) should be taken with a grain of salt. Nabīl Zarandī was one of the many people who had falsely claimed to be “the One Whom God Shall Make Manifest.” The words of someone who tries to falsely attribute such a supposedly high station to himself should be met with healthy skepticism.

`Abdu’l-Bahā clearly announces:

“The utterance of the [book or religion] of Bayān in the day of the appearance of his Highness A`lā (meaning the Bāb) was to behead, burn the books, destroy the monuments, and massacre [everyone] but those who believed [in the Bāb’s religion] and verified it.”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Egypt), vol. 2, p. 266.

The savagery in the Bāb’s laws can clearly be seen in Bahā’u’llāh’s words too:

“The unbelievers and the faithless have set their minds on four things: first, the shedding of blood [beheading]; second, the burning of books; third, the shunning of the followers of other religions; fourth, the extermination of other communities and groups. Now however, through the strengthening grace and potency of the Word of God these four barriers have been demolished, these clear injunctions have been obliterated from the Tablet and brutal dispositions have been transmuted into spiritual attributes.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Tablets of Bahā’u’llāh Revealed After the Kitāb-i-Aqdas, p. 91.

Since the Bābīs denied Bahā’u’llāh’s station, he refers to them as: “unbelievers and the faithless.” Regarding killing and savagery, `Abdu’l-Bahā says:

If religion causes killing and savagery it is not religion and having no religion is better than that. For religion is meant to be a cure. If a cure causes sickness then of course, no cure is better than it. Thus, if religion causes war and slaughter, then of course, it is better to have no religion.

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Payām-i malakūt, pp. 44–45.

According to these words, since the Bab gave orders for war, massacres, and plunder, then Bābism is not a religion. But then the question arises, if Bābism is not a religion, then what is Baha’ism? Did Baha’ism not arise as a continuation of Bābism and as a result of the tidings of the Bab to Him Whom God Shall Make Manifest? Does Baha’ism not proudly present itself as the spritiual successor to Babism? If Bābism is not a valid religion—which according to the current principle is not—then neither is Baha’ism.

Coutesy: Twelve Principles – A Comprehensive Investigation on the Bahai Teachings

Religion Must be the Source of Unity and Fellowship in the World

Introduction

“The third principle of his highness Bahā’u’llāh is that religion must be the source of fellowship. It must cause links among humanity. It must be a blessing of the Lord and if religion is a cause of enmity and a cause of war, its absence is better, and a lack of religion is better than religion. Rather, it must be the opposite. Religion must be a cause of fellowship and a cause of relations between the masses of humanity.”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Tehran), vol. 2, p. 146.

The meaning of “Religion Must Be the Source of Unity and Fellowship” is that religion must be the cause of kindness between people and if, as a result of religion, a group comes in conflict with another and enmity arises, that religion has no value.

`Abdu’l-Bahā reiterates many times that if religion causes divisions instead of unity, its non-existence is better than its existence:

“Religion must be the cause of unity and fellowship. If religion causes enmity it will have no result and having no religion is better. For it becomes the cause of enmity and hatred between humanity and whatever causes enmity is hated by God and whatever causes unity and fellowship is accepted and praised. If religion causes killing and savagery it is not religion and having no religion is better than that. For religion is meant to be a cure. If a cure causes sickness then of course, no cure is better than it. Thus, if religion causes war and slaughter, then of course, it is better to have no religion.”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Payām-i malakūt, pp. 44–45.

“Religion should create unity and create links between the hearts. Jesus and the other divine prophets came to create unity and fellowship. If religion causes divisions, its non-existence is preferred.”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Payām-i malakūt, p. 59.

Baha’is claim that Bahā’u’llāh has brought a new religion whose main purpose is to bring about world peace and unity to the world of humanity; this peace and unity must occur under the shadow of kindness and fellowship. If a religion does not bring about kindness, peace, and unity, then it is not a religion.

Is the Principle “Religion Must be the Source of Unity and Fellowship in the World” New?

Did the previous Divine Prophets causes enmity and disunity? Did they urge people to be evil, oppress, use foul language, and to start wars? Is this principle as `Abdu’l-Bahā claims new:

“He sets forth a new principle for this day in the announcement that religion must be the cause of unity, harmony and agreement among mankind. If it is the cause of discord and hostility, if it leads to separation and creates conflict, the absence of religion would be preferable in the world.”

Reference: Abdu’l-Bahā, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, pp. 454–455.

All divine prophets had appeared to overcome the divisions among humanity and to bring about fellowship among the people. `Abdu’l-Bahā confesses to this reality and says:

“All the Prophets came to nurture the people so that the immature individuals could reach maturity and to bring about kindness and love among the people, not hatred and enmity.”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Payām-i malakūt, p. 65.

Bible

“If you had known what these words mean, “I desire mercy, not sacrifice,” you would not have condemned the innocent.”

Reference: Book of Matthew, 12:7 (New International Version).

Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?” Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.”

Reference: Book of Matthew, 18:21–22 (New International Version).

Zoroastrian

“I pledge myself to the Mazdayasnian religion, which causes the attack to be put off and weapons put down.”

Reference: Avesta, Yasna 12, section 9, translated by L. H. Mills, Sacred Books of the East (American Edition, 1898).

It is obvious that in contrast to what Baha’is claim this principle is in no way novel and even amongst atheists and those that do not believe in any religion, there are countless individuals that have made kindness and servitude to others the goal of their lives. So, what is the innovation of Bahā’u’llāh and his religion?

Courtesy: Twelve Principles – A Comprehensive Investigation on the Bahai Teachings

Contradictions Part II-Religion Must Be in Conformity with Science and Reason

The Criterion for Being Knowledgeable and Reasonable in the Baha’i Creed?

Esslemont (Baha’i author): “The religious world owes a debt of gratitude to the men of science who helped to tear such worn-out creeds and dogmas to tatters and allowed the truth to step forth free.”

Reference: J. E. Esslemont, Bahā’u’llāh and the New Era, p. 200.

Bahā’u’llāh: If you don’t become a Baha’i you are ignorant even if you possess all the science in the world.

“If today, someone grasps all of the knowledge on earth but stops at the word ‘yes’ (meaning does not become a Baha’i), the Lord will not pay attention to him and he will be considered as the most ignorant amongst the people,”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Iqtidārāt wa chand lauḥ dīgar, p. 111.

“From now on nobody is to be called knowledgeable, except those who have decorated themselves with the garment of this New Affair (meaning those who have become Baha’is),”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Badī`, pp. 138–139.

If you do not become a Baha’i you have no reason.

“The general criterion is what we mentioned and any soul who has success in it, meaning recognizes and realizes the Sunrise of Manifestation (meaning himself), will be mentioned in the Divine Book as someone who possesses reason or else he will be (mentioned as) ignorant even if he himself thinks that his reason equals that of the whole world,”

Reference:`Abd a l-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 7, p. 160.

“No one has denied or will deny what has been revealed by the Ancient Pen (meaning himself) in this Most Great Manifestation regarding society, unity, manners, rites, and being occupied with what has benefits for the people, except that he completely lacks reason,”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Iqtidārāt wa chand lauḥ dīgar, p. 168.

 

Was the Tablet of Wisdom Revealed in Persian?

Shoghi: The tablet of wisdom was revealed in Persian.

When referring to a problematic matter in the English translation of this tablet he says: “We must not take this statement too literally; “contemporary” may have been meant in Persian as something far more elastic than the English word. Likewise, the whole translation probably needs revising (15 February 1947).”

Reference: Article titled Socrates compiled by the Research Department of the Universal House of Justice: http://bahai-library.com/compilation_socrates_bwc (retrieved
17/2/2014).

The tablet was revealed by Bahā’u’llāh in Arabic!

 

Is Shoghi Infallible?

Shoghi: I am only infallible in matters regarding the faith and interpreting it.

“The infallibility of the Guardian is confined to matters which are related strictly to the Cause and interpretations of the Teachings; he is not an infallible authority on other subjects, such as economics, science, etc,”

Reference: Shoghi Effendi, Directives from the Guardian, p. 33–34.

Shoghi makes errors when speaking about Bahā’u’llāh’s Tablet of Wisdom and claims it was revealed in Persian while it was revealed in Arabic.

Refer to Was the Tablet of Wisdom Revealed in Persian?

 

Can Shoghi Fit the Role of Being the Authorized Interpreter of Baha’i Texts?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: Shoghi is the authoritative interpreter of the words of God.

“O my loving friends! After the passing away of this wronged one, it is incumbent upon the Aghsān (Branches), the Afnān (Twigs) of the Sacred Lote-Tree, the Hands (pillars) of the Cause of God and the loved ones of the Abhā Beauty to turn unto Shoghi Effendi—the youthful branch branched from the two hallowed and sacred Lote-Trees and the fruit grown from the union of the two offshoots of the Tree of Holiness,—as he is the sign of God, the chosen branch, the Guardian of the Cause of God, he unto whom all the Aghsān, the Afnān, the Hands of the Cause of God and His loved ones must turn. He is the Interpreter of the Word of God and after him will succeed the first-born of his lineal descendents,”

Reference:`Abdu’l-Bahā, The Will and Testament of `Abdu’l-Bahā, p. 11.

Shoghi is unsure in interpreting the words of Bahā’u’llāh and uses the words may and probably.

“We must not take this statement too literally; “contemporary” may have been meant in Persian as something far more elastic than the English word. Likewise, the whole translation probably needs revising (15 February 1947),”

Reference: Article titled Socrates compiled by the Research Department of the Universal House of Justice: http://bahai-library.com/compilation_socrates_bwc
(retrieved 17/2/2014).

He doesn’t even consider his own translations as final.

“Concerning the different translations of the Words. It is surely the original text that should never be changed. The translations will continue to vary as more and better translations are made. Shoghi Effendi does not consider even his own translations as final, how much more translations made in the early days of the Cause in the West when no competent translators existed (From a letter on behalf of the Guardian to John Hyde Dunn, 14 August 1930),”

Reference: http://bahai-library.com/compilation_provisional_translations (retrieved 18/2/2014).

Bahā’u’llāh and Divine Knowledge: Referring to Books

Bahā’u’llāh: Whenever I want to quote a book it is revealed in a tablet before my face.

“Whenever We desire to quote the sayings of the learned and of the wise, presently there will appear before the face of thy Lord in the form of a tablet all that which hath appeared in the world and is revealed in the Holy Books and Scriptures,”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Tablets of Bahā’u’llāh Revealed After the Kitāb-i-Aqdas, p. 149.

“You know that we did not read the books of the people and were unaware of the sciences that they possessed.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`ihī az alwāḥ jamāl aqdas abhā ki ba`d az kitāb Aqdas nāzil shude. (Langenhain [Germany]: Lajniyi Nashr Āthār Amrī Bi Lisān Fārsī wa `Arabī), p. 89.

Bahā’u’llāh: I searched in vain for a book to see what the author had written in it until I finally found it!

“As We had frequently heard about him, We purposed to read some of his works. Although We never felt disposed to peruse other peoples’ writings, yet as some had questioned Us concerning him, We felt it necessary to refer to his books, in order that We might answer Our questioners with knowledge and understanding. His works, in the Arabic tongue, were, however, not available, . . . We sent for the book, and kept it with Us a few days. It was probably referred to twice,”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, The Kitāb-i-Īqān, pp. 184–186.

I used to read books when I was a child.

“This oppressed one in his childhood (ṭufūliyyat) saw the war of the tribe of Qurayẓa in a book that belonged to (was authored by) Mullā Bāqir Majlisī, and has been sad and sorrowful ever-since,”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 7, p. 136

 

Had Bahā’u’llāh Associated with the Learned and the `Ulamā?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: “As all the people of Persia know, He had never studied in any school, nor had He associated with the `ulamā or the men of learning.”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Some Answered Questions, p. 27.

`Abdu’l-Bahā: My father used to associate with the learned and the `Ulamā!

“When He was only thirteen or fourteen years old He became renowned for His learning. He would converse on any subject and solve any problem presented to Him. In large gatherings He would discuss matters with the `Ulamā (leading mullās) and would explain intricate religious questions. All of them used to listen to Him with the greatest interest,”

Reference: J. E. Esslemont, Bahā’u’llāh and the New Era, p. 48

“In whatever meeting, scientific assembly or theological discussion He was found, He became the authority of explanation upon intricate and abstruse questions presented,”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Bahā’ī World Faith—Selected Writings of Bahā’u’llāh and `Abdu’l-Bahā (`Abdu’l-Bahā’s Section Only), p. 220.

 

Bahā’u’llāh’s Childhood: Happiness or Sorrow?

`Abdu’l-Bahā: “The early part of His life was passed in the greatest happiness.”

Reference: `Abdu’l-Bahā, Some Answered Questions, p. 27.

Bahā’u’llāh: “This oppressed one in his childhood (ṭufūliyyat) saw the war of the tribe of Qurayẓa in a book that belonged to (was authored by) Mullā Bāqir Majlisī, and has been sad and sorrowful ever-since.”

Reference: `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 7, p. 136.

 

When and Where to Bury the Dead

Bahā’u’llāh: “It is forbidden you to transport the body of the deceased a greater distance than one hour’s journey from the city.”

Reference: Bahā’u’llāh, The Kitābi Aqdas, p. 230.

Under Bahā’u’llāh and `Abdu’l-Bahā’s orders, this one hour limit changes to fifty years and thousands of kilometers for the Bāb!

“As observed in a previous chapter the mangled bodies of the Bāb and His fellow-martyr, Mīrzā Muḥammad-`Alī, were removed, in the middle of the second night following their execution, through the pious intervention of Ḥājī Sulaymān Khān, from the edge of the moat where they had been cast to a silk factory owned by one of the believers of Milān, and were laid the next day in a wooden casket, and thence carried to a place of safety. Subsequently, according to Bahā’u’llāh’s instructions, they were transported to Ṭihrān and placed in the shrine of Imām-Zādih Ḥasan. They were later removed to the residence of Ḥājī Sulaymān Khān himself in the Sar-Chashmih quarter of the city, and from his house were taken to the shrine of Imām-Zādih Ma`ṣūm, where they remained concealed until the year 274 1284 A.H. (1867–1868), when a Tablet, revealed by Bahā’u’llāh in Adrianople, directed Mullā `Alī-Akbar-i-Shāhmīrzādī and Jamāl-i-Burūjirdī to transfer them without delay to some other spot . . . Ḥājī Shāh Muḥammad buried the casket beneath the floor of the inner sanctuary of the shrine of Imām-Zādih Zayd, where it lay undetected until Mīrzā Asadu’llāh-i-Iṣfahānī was informed of its exact location through a chart forwarded to him by Bahā’u’llāh. Instructed by Bahā’u’llāh to conceal it elsewhere, he first removed the remains to his own house in Ṭihrān, after which they were deposited in several other localities such as the house of Ḥusayn-‘Alīy-i-Iṣfahānī and that of Muḥammad-Karīm-i-‘Aṭṭār, where they remained hidden until the year 1316 (1899) A.H., when, in pursuance of directions issued by ‘Abdu’l-Bahā, this same Mīrzā Asadu’llāh, together with a number of other believers, transported them by way of Iṣfahān, Kirmanshāh, Baghdād and Damascus, to Beirut and thence by sea to ‘Akkā, arriving at their destination on the 19th of the month of Ramadān 1316 A.H. (January 31, 1899), fifty lunar years after the Bāb’s execution in Tabrīz,”

Reference: Shoghi Effendi, God Passes By, pp. 273–274.

Courtesy: Twelve Principles – A Comprehensive Investigation on the Bahai Teachings