what convinced you your faith is the truth?

[imranshaykh]

Originally Posted by BruceDLimber

Imran, it's not a matter of whole books.

The Bab's major works are the Bayan ("Exposition") and the Kitab-i-Asma (Book of Names). But parts of these are still in effect, while other parts are superceded. You'd need to look at the Writings of Baha'u'llah in general to see this, I think.

And you can find these (as well as the Bab's works) at: www.bahai-library.org and www.reference.bahai.org

I also have an entire manuscript that describes the transition from the Babi teachings to the Baha'i teachings, but unfortunately I'm currently not at the computer that has this. If you'd like to send me your email address in about two weeks, I'll be happy to forward you a copy!

Peace,

Bruce

Many thanks for the offer to send me the document. I would be delighted to receive it. My email address is imranshaykh@gmail.com

On the issue of the Bab's books, I am quite sure that Bahaullah has not abrogated them. Nor is there any material which indicates that Bahaullah abrogated parts of them and kept the rest. If this is a common belief of the Bahais, then the reference for the same should be available commonly.

I started my studies on the Bahai Faith more than 10 years ago and armed with the understanding of the source languages, I had the opportunity to read more books of the Bab than average Bahais.

Can any person tell me what is the current opinion of the Bahais on the following books of the Bab:

1. Dalaaelus Sabah (Seven Proofs)
2. Tafseere' Surah Kausar (Exegesis on the Chapter of Abundance)
3. Sahifae Adaliya (Book of Justice)
4. Lauhe Haykaluddin (written 14 days before his death).

Regards
Imran Shaykh

[BruceDLimber]

Imran, becuase I don't have access to the books you asked about, I can't comment on them.

And for the record, most (tho' not all) of the Bab's laws were indeed revoked or superceded by those of Baha'u'llah! The paper I'll be sending you should help make this clear.

Best,

Bruce

[imranshaykh]

Originally Posted by BruceDLimber

Imran, becuase I don't have access to the books you asked about, I can't comment on them.

And for the record, most (tho' not all) of the Bab's laws were indeed revoked or superceded by those of Baha'u'llah! The paper I'll be sending you should help make this clear.

Best,

Bruce

I will be happy to receive the paper. My email address is imranshaykh@gmail.com

Having said that, given that the Bab is widely considered to be the harbringer of the Bahai Faith, is it not necessary to understand his books for a holistic perspective as opposed to narrowing our thoughts based on only one / two books?

I will be happy to send these books to you in PDF format or the links to these books on the Internet. Secondly, regarding the books, it does not matter if a person has not read the books - my point is that is it accepted that these books were authored by the Bab?

Again, I will appreciate it if the law for the revoking of Bab's books or the law which says that only some books of the Bab should be referred to is given from the quotations of Bahaullah. I am well conversant with the source languages like Arabic and Persian so even if the source material is in those languages, it will do. Also, I would like to see, if possible a direct quotation from Bahaullah as opposed to the interpretation of some author.

Regards
Imran

[BruceDLimber]

Originally Posted by imranshaykh

my point is that is it accepted that these books were authored by the Bab?

Imran, I can say this only:

I've been a Baha'i for over 34 1/2 years, and I've NEVER EVEN HEARD of these other books until you mentioned them this week!

So I would be extremely hesitant to call them works of the Bab unless and until I can verify this from a Baha'i source, the more so because there are (as Brian noted) anti-Baha'i and anti-Babi sites out there that post a lot of disinformation to try to confuse Baha'is and drive others away from the Faith (and this may well include faked books).

I'll let you know if I find out anything specific.

Regards,

Bruce

[imranshaykh]

Originally Posted by BruceDLimber

Imran, I can say this only:

I've been a Baha'i for over 34 1/2 years, and I've NEVER EVEN HEARD of these other books until you mentioned them this week!

So I would be extremely hesitant to call them works of the Bab unless and until I can verify this from a Baha'i source, the more so because there are (as Brian noted) anti-Baha'i and anti-Babi sites out there that post a lot of disinformation to try to confuse Baha'is and drive others away from the Faith (and this may well include faked books).

I'll let you know if I find out anything specific.

Regards,

Bruce

Thanks Bruce:

You have just confirmed what I have believed - it is true that Bahais have never heard of these books - they have been "silenced" by the Bahais - never mentioned, never translated. Would you believe that that Qayyamul Asma and the Bayan have never been translated completely. Is'nt that very surprising? Not a single work of the Bab has been translated into English.

Have you heard of Qayyamul Asma? Kitabe' Panj Shaan? All these are the books of the Bab.

As regards the "anti-stuff" available, ignorance is bliss - since the average Bahai does not know about these books, so anything contrary to belief will be considered as "anti".

I request your godself to please inform me of these books. These books are critical to my understanding of the Bahai Faith.

Regards
Imran

[BruceDLimber]

Imran, hi!

I've checked with someone who might be considered an expert in the field--he served as the Librarian at the Baha'i World Center for a number of years.

He says "The Seven Proofs" is in fact incorporated into Selections from the Writings of the Bab--the best-known compilation of His works; as to the rest, I quote:

These are all considered works by the Báb. The contents are of interest to Bahá'ís as sacred scripture, but, as with the Bible and the Qur'an, any specific laws in them are not binding on Bahá'ís. The broad spiritual principles remain important.

So there you have it!

And please note that, as I said before, most Babi laws are NOT binding upon Baha'is since only a few things, such as the calendar, were retained from the Babi Faith....

Regards,

Bruce

[imranshaykh]

Originally Posted by BruceDLimber

Imran, hi!

I've checked with someone who might be considered an expert in the field--he served as the Librarian at the Baha'i World Center for a number of years.

He says "The Seven Proofs" is in fact incorporated into Selections from the Writings of the Bab--the best-known compilation of His works; as to the rest, I quote:

These are all considered works by the Báb. The contents are of interest to Bahá'ís as sacred scripture, but, as with the Bible and the Qur'an, any specific laws in them are not binding on Bahá'ís. The broad spiritual principles remain important.

So there you have it!

And please note that, as I said before, most Babi laws are NOT binding upon Baha'is since only a few things, such as the calendar, were retained from the Babi Faith....

Regards,

Bruce

Incidentally, none of these books are books of law. They are all books of concepts. So even if the laws are not binding, are the concepts binding upon the Bahais?

I apologise for repeating the question - Are there any words of Bahaullah which one can quote for selecting which concepts are binding and which are not. Are the followers left to themselves to decide?

Incidentally, these books contain concepts which are materially very damaging to the Bahai Faith. In fact some of them are totally contrary to that of the Bahais. I am delighted that the Bahai authorities actually acknowledge these books. If one goes by the logic that each new dispensation brought a new set of laws and concepts as per the needs of the time - there was hardly a gap between that of the Bab and Bahaullah. In fact not even a generation gap. Why did the dispensation change so fast as there was hardl any change in the thought process or mental make up of the adherents? Why is that the concepts, not the laws of the Bab are diametrically opposite to that of Bahaullah.

Regards
Imran

[BruceDLimber]

Originally Posted by imranshaykh

Incidentally, none of these books are books of law. They are all books of concepts. So even if the laws are not binding, are the concepts binding upon the Bahais?

I apologise for repeating the question - Are there any words of Bahaullah which one can quote for selecting which concepts are binding and which are not. Are the followers left to themselves to decide?

Incidentally, these books contain concepts which are materially very damaging to the Bahai Faith.

On the contrary, we don't see the Babi texts as the LEAST "damaging!"

It's important to remember that the Babi laws and Writings were not INTENDED to be permanent, but only to signal the transition from Islam to the soon-to-appear Baha'i Faith.

And whether they're concepts or laws, the key remains the same: It is the Writings of Bahau'llah (and His appointed successor, 'Abdu'l-Baha) that define the Baha'i Faith, its laws, and its teachings. They are very much the standard, and no, this is not a matter of individuals' picking and choosing things (save for making the overall decision of whether or not to accept Baha'u'llah as a whole).

Best,

Bruce

[I, Brian]

Imran, remember at the beginning I said that the Baha'i board was not for criticism of the Baha'i faith.

At present all you are doing is trying to criticise the Baha'i faith, and it's not welcome, just as Baha'is criticising Islam on the Islam board wouldn't be tolerated.

If you have any sincere enquiring questions, then you are welcome to ask them - but if you're you're interested in doing is trying to attack the Baha'i faith on their own board, then you'll simply find your access to CR removed.

I've warned you about this issue before - you don't get another warning.

[arthra]

Imran wrote:

If one goes by the logic that each new dispensation brought a new set of laws and concepts as per the needs of the time - there was hardly a gap between that of the Bab and Bahaullah. In fact not even a generation gap. Why did the dispensation change so fast as there was hardl any change in the thought process or mental make up of the adherents?

My reply:

I think that is a fair question... but it probably deserves a separate topic namely the history of the Baha'i Faith.

Remember that the Babi movement had undergone a great deal of pressure from the ecclesiastical and state authorities in a few years. About twenty thousand people were martyred.

The purpose of the Babi dispensation we think was to shake things up... and prepare the way for "Him Whom God would make Manifest" From the Writings of the Bab you have a feeling of how powerful this Dispensation would be:

"ON the Day of Resurrection when He Whom God will make manifest cometh unto you, invested with conclusive proofs, ye shall hold His Cause as being devoid of truth, whereas God hath apprised you in the Bayán that no similarity existeth between the Cause of Him Whom God will make manifest and the cause of others. How can anyone besides God reveal a verse such as to overwhelm all mankind? Say, great is God! Who else but Him Whom God will make manifest can spontaneously recite verses which proceed from His Lord—a feat that no mortal man can ever hope to accomplish?"

From the Kitab-i-Asma found in Selections from the Writings of the Bab.

There are some parallels in history to this in the relationship between John the Baptist and Jesus Christ Who were contemporaries. Recall that some of the disciples of John later became disciples of Christ just as many of the Babis later became Baha'is. Lord Buddha and Mahavira Jina were also contemportaries..

Spiritually though and at Their Core we believe the Message of the Bab and Baha'u'llah were the same but the aims and purposes differed.

- Art

[imranshaykh]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Imran, remember at the beginning I said that the Baha'i board was not for criticism of the Baha'i faith.

At present all you are doing is trying to criticise the Baha'i faith, and it's not welcome, just as Baha'is criticising Islam on the Islam board wouldn't be tolerated.

If you have any sincere enquiring questions, then you are welcome to ask them - but if you're you're interested in doing is trying to attack the Baha'i faith on their own board, then you'll simply find your access to CR removed.

I've warned you about this issue before - you don't get another warning.

Nobody is criticising the Bahai Faith - this is a very unfair comment. Is this board a one way street with no objectivity or that one is only expected to listen to whatever other members are saying without raising any questions?

Go through my posts - I have been a student of the Faith for more than 10 years and have studied the Faith. Who should I get my questions clarified from? I came here, and I said it right upfront, not to convert Bahais into Muslims nor to get myself or other Muslims converted to Bahaism. I came here to learn.

Yet, I see that Bahais are allowed to post links to whatever they wish. Yet, when I put a link to my web site, it was called "antagonistic". Very unfair.

You can do whatever you want. You are the administrator after all. Yet, I repeat, I have asked questions in a very civilised manner and not in a way that would hurt the sensibilities of any person, leave alone the Bahais.

Regards
Imran Shaykh

[imranshaykh]

Originally Posted by BruceDLimber

On the contrary, we don't see the Babi texts as the LEAST "damaging!"

It's important to remember that the Babi laws and Writings were not INTENDED to be permanent, but only to signal the transition from Islam to the soon-to-appear Baha'i Faith.

And whether they're concepts or laws, the key remains the same: It is the Writings of Bahau'llah (and His appointed successor, 'Abdu'l-Baha) that define the Baha'i Faith, its laws, and its teachings. They are very much the standard, and no, this is not a matter of individuals' picking and choosing things (save for making the overall decision of whether or not to accept Baha'u'llah as a whole).

Best,

Bruce

Sorry for repeating the question - is there any standard by which one can judge which texts of the Bab are in force and which superceeded. Which should be referred for learning and which discarded? If there is any comment or direct law from the words of Bahaullah, it would be most clear direction for us.

One can wish to accept Bahaullah as a whole. However if Bab is the forerunner of the Faith (and Bahaullah), will it be correct only to accept the words of the Bab in which there is an allusion to Bahaullah or to read his words from a holistic perspective?

Regards
Imran

[imranshaykh]

Originally Posted by BruceDLimber

On the contrary, we don't see the Babi texts as the LEAST "damaging!"

It's important to remember that the Babi laws and Writings were not INTENDED to be permanent, but only to signal the transition from Islam to the soon-to-appear Baha'i Faith.

And whether they're concepts or laws, the key remains the same: It is the Writings of Bahau'llah (and His appointed successor, 'Abdu'l-Baha) that define the Baha'i Faith, its laws, and its teachings. They are very much the standard, and no, this is not a matter of individuals' picking and choosing things (save for making the overall decision of whether or not to accept Baha'u'llah as a whole).

Best,

Bruce

Dear Bruce, you mentioned, "It's important to remember that the Babi laws and Writings were not INTENDED to be permanent, but only to signal the transition from Islam to the soon-to-appear Baha'i Faith."

Is there some word from Bahaullah to this effect?

Did the Holy Prophet of Islam say something to this effect?

Regards
Imran

[arthra]

Originally Posted by imranshaykh

Dear Bruce, you mentioned, "It's important to remember that the Babi laws and Writings were not INTENDED to be permanent, but only to signal the transition from Islam to the soon-to-appear Baha'i Faith."

Is there some word from Bahaullah to this effect?

Did the Holy Prophet of Islam say something to this effect?

Regards
Imran

The Bab Himself referred to the primacy of "Him Whom God will make manifest" has being able to abrogate all the laws of the Bayan. Every dispensation is a resurrection in the Baha'i concept... but this Imran again takes us away from the actual topic here which is "What convinced you your faith is the truth".

- Art

[imranshaykh]

Originally Posted by arthra

The Bab Himself referred to the primacy of "Him Whom God will make manifest" has being able to abrogate all the laws of the Bayan. Every dispensation is a resurrection in the Baha'i concept... but this Imran again takes us away from the actual topic here which is "What convinced you your faith is the truth".
- Art

Dear Art:

We are in fact dealing with "what convinced you your Faith is the truth". Since this is thread within the Bahai domain and going by the first question posted in the thread, it is very relevant.

If one has to study the Bahai Faith, one cannot ignore the Babi dispensation since, as you have correctly outlined, the Bahai Faith considers the Bab as the one who prophecised about "Whom Allah will Manifest" One cannot correctly study the Babi dispensation without understanding the life and the times of the Bab. Hence one needs to be convinced about the Bab primarily so that one can be convinced about the Bahai Faith.

Right from his first revelation and successively in his books, the Bab referred to Mohammed Ibnil Hasan by name and by genealogy as the revered 12th Imam. At 4 places, Qayyamul Asma (hs first revelation), Dalaelus Sabah, Sahifae Adaliyah and Tafseere' Surah Kausar, the Bab said that Mohammed Ibnil Hasan is the 12th Imam - in fact, he not only acknowledged the 12th Imam, but also prayed to him for deliverance. In the book, Tafseere' Surah Kausar, he says that Baqiyatullah, Sahibazzaman, Al Qaem, Al Mahdi is Mohammed Ibnil Hasan and that when he was in Mecca, he saw a revered person who he (the Bab) thought was the 12th Imam. Again, for dear of being labelled antagonistic, I am unable to include the links to these pages in this thread. These books are in Arabic as well as in Persian. Perhaps if you send me your email address, I will send these to you.

- just a clarification - Mohammed Ibnil Hasan, the 12th Shiite Imam, who the Shiites believe is in occultation. Mohammed Ibnil Hasan is also called Baqiyatullah, Sahebazzaman, Al Qaem and Al Mahdi by the Shiites from traditions which have their origin more than 1000 years before the advent of the Bab and the Bahai Faith.

So my question is how does one know that the Bab was referring to Bahaullah only and not to Mohammed Ibnil Hasan as "the one whom Allah will Manifest".

Throughout his life, the Bab gave clear signals that the 12th Imam, Mohammed Ibnil Hasan is the one whom he (he Bab) himself was awaiting. This is clear from his words in which he mentions the 12th Imam ans the prophecies about him by name and by geneology. Why should one believe that Bahaullah was the one whom Allah will Manifest.

I, in extreme humility, request your opinion in this regard so that the doubt in my mind should be erased.

Regards
Imran