A list of some censored books on the Baha'i Faith

Kitab-i-Nuqtatu'l-Kaf

Here's a list of some censored books on the Baha'i Faith. These books were all suppressed by the Baha'i authorities, and in some cases, the authors were killed.

It would be great to see a more organised effort to distribute and translate these Persian works. Please feel free to add to the list, or share translations if you are aware of any.

  • Nuqtatu'l-Kaf
    • Nuqtatu'l-Kaf is a book that was originally published in 1851 but was suppressed in Iran. It contains material that is hostile to the Baha'i Faith. When E.G. Browne published the book with Persian and English introductions, a number of Baha'i scholars worked on refutations of the book, including Siyyid Mahdi Gulpaygani and Mirza Abu'l-Fadl. The book was discovered by E.G. Browne in Paris and published by him. This horrified Baha'i leaders who accused him of having become an Azali and of receiving a bribe from them to publish the book.
  • The Philosophy of Niku (Filsifa-i-Niku)
    • Even after he had given up the Baha’i faith, the Baha’is of Teheran continued to claim him as one of their own, and Niku was forced to write several volumes in Persian entitled “The Philosophy of Niku,” to prove that he had left the movement. In an able and interesting manner, Niku described the things which he had seen and heard which disillusioned him, such as the worldly ambition of Abdu’l-Baha, his greed for money, and his flattering epistles to great and wealthy people whom he hoped to win as disciples.
  • Hash Bihisht (The Eight Paradises)
    • The Hasht Bihisht is a book written by two sons-in-law of Subh-i-Azal, which contains the teachings and sayings of Haji Sayyid Jawad of Karbala, who was among the first Letters of the Living in the Bayan hierarchy. The book's preface discusses the virtues and claims of the Bayan religion over all other religions, while the body of the work consists of eight chapters dealing with the practice of the Bayan religion and the events of the Day of Resurrection. The book also contains an Elucidation of the Direful Mischief, which refers to the secession between the Azalis and the Bahais, and ends with a narrative of a visit to Acre by one of the people of the Bayan, Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman, who was also one of the co-authors of the book. The work is considered a systematic treatise in the philosophy, theory, ethics, morality, and history of the Bayan religion.
  • Kitab-i-Subhi
    • The Kitab-i-Subhi, written by Mirza Subhi, a former Persian scribe to Sir Abbas Effendi and a Bahai missionary. He wrote two books explaining why he left the Baha'i faith.
  • Kashf-al-Hiyal (Exposure of Deception)
    • The book Kashf-al-Hiyal was written by Abd-al-Husayn Avarih, who was a Bahá'í and had also written the Kavakibu'd-Durriyyih, an important history of the Bahá'í Faith. However, he later left the Bahá'í Faith and wrote the Kashf-al-Hiyal in three volumes. In the book, he related how he became a Bahá'í and why he defected. He also mentioned that while writing the history of the movement, Abdu’l-Baha forced him to misrepresent the facts. Avarih was a member of the Hands of the Cause and a prominent Bahá'í missionary who was greatly revered by the Bahá'ís. He served Shoghi Efendi for a number of years and was sent by him to Europe to make converts but later left the movement. In Kashf-al-Hiyal, Avarih confirmed the account of Hasht-Bihisht and added that the assassins of Baha's brother Mirza Musa were Ustad Muhammad Ali the Barber and his accomplices.
  • Book of Seraj
  • Book of Qahir
  • Tanbihun-Naimin
    • The Tanbihun-Naimin, also known as The Awakening of the Sleepers, is a book comprising four parts. The first part is a facsimile of a letter from Abdul Baha to his aunt known as Khanum-i-Buzurg, urging her to believe in Baha and to renounce his half-brother Subh-i-Azal. The second part is a long reply from Khanum-i-Buzurg, commonly called Risala-i Amma, containing historical and biographical information about the Bahais, particularly during the Baghdad period and the schism between the Bahais and Azalis. The reply rebuts the claims of Baha'u'llah. The third part is a homily in Arabic followed by a refutation in Persian, both by Mirza Ahmad of Kerman. The fourth part is a facsimile of the Will and Testament of Baha, with the preamble and concluding notes in Baha's handwriting and the body of the will in his secretary's handwriting.

https://www.reddit.com/r/exbahai/comments/11pev32/censored_books_on_the_bahai_faith/

Baha'u'llah - A Serial Murderer

Baha'u'llah

It's known that Baha'u'llah's ambitions for leadership created a trail of homicides across the Middle East, several of which are acknowledged even by Baha'i sources.

Baha'u'llah was involved in upwards of 20 homicides, including prominent Babis who didn't accept his claims to be HWGSMM and Azalis who opposed him. This is not to count Baha'u'llah's involvement in organising military insurgencies where many hundreds died.

Is there a complete list of the known victims of these crimes?

Here are a few I've gathered:

Hajji Mirza Ahmad of Kashan -- murdered in Baghdad, author of the early Babi history Kitab-i Nuqtat al-Kaf, a Babi who was loyal to Subh-i-Azal

Mirza `Alī Muhammad Sarrāj -- murdered in Baghdad by stabbing, author of a book opposing the claim that Baha'u'llah was HWGSMM

Sayyid Ismail Zawareh -- murdered in Baghdad, his throat was cut and the knife placed in his hand to make it look self-inflicted

Aqa Ali Muhammad -- murdered in Baghdad, a brother-in-law of the Bab

Aqa Abul Jasim of Kashan -- murdered in Baghdad, "because he had reported to Subh-i Azal that he heard that Baha’s pretension was that he was the return of the Imam Hussein"

Mullā Rajab `Alī (Qahir) -- murdered in Karbala, brother of Sarraj and a supporter of Subh-i-Azal. He was murdered with a revolver by a Baha'i man called Nasur the Arab.

Aqa Sayyid Ali the Arab -- murdered in Tabriz

Mirza Nasrullah -- murdered in Edirne, the brother-in-law of Subh-i-Azal

Mulla Rajab Ali Qahir -- murdered in Karbala, a brother-in-law of the Bab

Haji Mirza Muhammad Rida -- murdered in Akka, maternal uncle of Haji Sayyid Muhammad of Isfahan

Sayyid Muhammad Isfahani -- murdered in Akka, a supporter of Subh-i-Azal, seven Baha'is were convicted and jailed

Aqa Jan Kaj-Kulah -- murdered in Akka, a supporter of Subh-i-Azal, seven Baha'is were convicted and jailed

Mirza Rida-Quli Tafrishi -- murdered in Akka, a supporter of Subh-i-Azal, seven Baha'is were convicted and jailed

Muhammad Khan -- murdered in Akka, murdered in the Carawansaray of corn-sellers, buried in a shallow grave and discovered by authorities

Hajji Ibrahim -- murdered in Akka, murdered in the Carawansaray of corn-sellers, buried in a shallow grave and discovered by authorities

Source : https://www.reddit.com/r/exbahai/comments/11jgnv4/bahaullah_a_serial_murderer/

Now Ruhi Book-1 is even more tolerant!



Here are two quotes in Ruhi Book One which were removed in the latest revised, updated edition: -

"Whoso hath failed to recognize Him will have condemned himself to the misery of remoteness, a remoteness which is naught but utter nothingness and the essence of the nethermost fire."

"The souls of the infidels, however, shall—and to this I bear witness—when breathing their last be made aware of the good things that have escaped them, and shall bemoan their plight, and shall humble themselves before God. They shall continue doing so after the separation of their souls from their bodies.”

I still remember the reaction of a "seeker" to that second quote during Ruhi Book One. She thought she was learning about a tolerant religion of love and unity, and this quote shattered the illusion. She didn't come back for Book Two!

They're adapting to this by simply removing the quotes that aren't fashionable. Classic Baha'i marketing.

With over 110 years of activity there are only 300 Baha'is in Mumbai, India.

History of the Baha'i faith in Bombay, India:

The first Baha'is in Mumbai were members of the Afnan family, who had set up a business in the city. In 1872, the Afnans requested Baha’u’llah to send a teacher to Mumbai. Jamal Effendi was sent in response to this request and arrived in Mumbai in 1883.

Over time, many prominent people taught the Baha'i faith in Mumbai, including Mirza Mohammed Ali, the son of Baha'u'llah, and Mirza Hadi Shirazi, the father of Shoghi Effendi. These individuals, who later broke the so-called Covenant of Baha'u'llah, played an important role in spreading the Baha'i faith throughout the city.

Additionally, the Afnan family established a printing press in Mumbai, which was used to print Arabic and Persian Baha'i books. These books were then shipped to other regions, including Persia and Egypt, to help spread the teachings of the Baha'i faith even further. In general, the initial phase of the Baha'i faith in Mumbai was defined by the endeavors of a notable group of people who worked towards persuading the Indians to accept the Baha'i faith. Subsequently, the formation of the first Local Spiritual Assembly took place in Bombay in 1911.

Bombay Baha'i Community in 1932

Several other important figures who visited Mumbai (formerly known as Bombay) to encourage local Baha'is to teach their religion, were Hands of the Cause, including Mr. Faizi, Dr. Mohajer, Dorothy Baker, Mr. Samandari, Mr. Khazeh, and Mr. Khadem.

Ruhiyyih Khanum visited Bombay in 1973

In addition to the visits from the Hands of the Cause, Ruhiyyih Khanum, the wife of Shoghi Effendi, visited Bombay for a conference in 1973. This was an important event for the local Baha'i community, as Ruhiyyih Khanum was a highly respected and influential figure for the Baha'is, and her visit likely served to inspire and encourage them in Mumbai.

What is the current situation of the Baha'i community in Mumbai?

Bombay Baha'i Community celebrating the festival of Ridvan

We received an email from a disenchanted senior Baha'i residing in Mumbai, which stated that the number of Baha'is in the city are currently below 200 in number. According to the letter, a vast majority of individuals who were once Baha'is, just like the descendants of Baha'u'llah, have now converted to other religions. It was also mentioned that only a small group of less than 70 active Baha'is currently participate in the Ridvan Elections.

What is the cause of this downfall?

While most religions are based on faith and spirituality, there are some cults that rely on deceit and manipulation to draw in new members. Baha'i faith is one such cult that exaggerates the size of its membership and claims to be a “world religion”. Baha'i faith is a prime example of how a cult can be used to manipulate and deceive people.

At the heart of the Baha'i faith is a false claim that it has millions of members worldwide. This number is far greater than the actual number of members, which is likely in the thousands. To bolster this claim, Baha'is have used clever marketing strategies to make it seem larger than it really is. For example, it has created numerous websites and other online presences, all of which purport to represent it's worldwide membership.

In addition to exaggerating the size of its membership, Baha'is also use deceptive tactics to lure people into joining. Baha'i faith makes false promises of unity of religion and the unity of mankind. It promises that the membership will bring about the most great peace!

Lies exposed:

The truth always has a way of coming out, and in the case of the Baha'i faith, their lies have finally been exposed. In 2017, the Indian Express published a news by the Baha'is claiming that there are 2500-3000 Baha'is in Mumbai. However, in 2023, the cult has been exposed as having only 300 members. (Check the report by Free Press Journal on Ayyan-i-Ha celebrations in Mumbai). In 2019 also, there were only 300 Baha'is! (Check DNA report) This significant difference in numbers begs the question: what else has this cult been lying about?

It is not uncommon for the Baha'is to lie about the size of their communities or the success of their Institute Process to keep their members and potential new recruits hooked. In this case, the cult's lies about its membership numbers are a clear indication of its manipulative tactics.

Sources:

2023 - https://www.freepressjournal.in/mumbai/mumbai-four-days-of-spirituality-charity-mark-intercalary-days-for-bahais

2019 - https://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-mumbai-bahais-spend-time-in-prayers-fast-for-spiritual-nourishment-2726496

2017 - https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/bahai-founders-200th-birth-anniversary-today-4900699/

Another Haifan Baha'i Gets Busted on Reddit

 Posted on February 7, 2023

A subreddit devoted to religion in general got a post from a Muslim about the Baha’i Faith.

Questions for bahai's
by u/Narwhal_Songs in religion

But among the comments there was a verbal tennis match between trident, a Unitarian Baha’i, and FrenchBread, a Haifan Baha’i.

You will have many responses if you post this in r/bahai
________________
Baha’i
r/Freespeechbahai for alternative Bahai perspectives

________________

you aren’t even a Baha’i
________________
Baha’i

Yes I am

_______________

There is no such thing as Haifan or Unitarian Bahá’ís. You can’t make things up like that. I can call myself the Wizard of Oz but it doesn’t mean anything.
___________________________
Baha’i

The difference between Haifan and Unitarian Bahais is Haifan Baha’is believe that after Baha’u’llah’s death Abdul Baha’s Will was to be followed, which appointed Shoghi Effendi and then the UHJ as the successors, whereas Unitarian Bahais believe that after Baha’u’llah’s death the instructions of the Kitab i Ahd were to be followed, which appointed Mirza Muhammad Ali as the successor of Abdul Baha.

I don’t see why you think there is no such thing as a Unitarian Bahai.

__________________

The Kitab-i-Ahd did not appoint Mirza Muhammad Ali. Go read it again.
_______________________
Baha’i

It says Abdul Baha and then Muhammad Ali after him.

_____________________

No it says the station of Muhammad Ali is beneath that of Abdul’Baha. It says nothing of him succeeding Abdul’Baha. It also says we must obey Abdul’Baha and to turn away from him is like turning away from Baha’u’llah. Abdul’Baha was free to choose his successor and he chose Shoghi Effendi. It’s a done deal. There is nothing to argue.
____________________

Only in the Haifan translation. Beneath is a mistranslation of the word بعد, which means “after” and does not mean “beneath”. Earlier translations did not use the word beneath. I include the Horace Holley translation in this post:

https://old.reddit.com/r/FreeSpeechBahai/comments/pbkwoe/my_interpretation_of_bahaullahs_successor/

The word “beneath” is not found here.

This is what the Kitab i Ahd says in the original language:

وصيّة اللّه آنکه بايد اغصان و افنان و منتسبين طرّاً بغصن اعظم ناظر باشند انظروا ما انزلناه فی کتابی الاقدس اذا غيض بحر الوصال و قضی کتاب المبدء فی المآل توجّهوا اِلی من اراده اللّه الّذی انشعب من هذا الاصل القديم مقصود از اين آيه مبارکه غصن اعظم بوده کذلک اظهرنا الامر فضلاً من عندنا و انا الفضّال الکريم قد قدّر اللّه مقام الغصن الاکبر بعد مقامه انّه هو الآمر الحکيم قد اصطفينا الاکبر بعد الاعظم امراً من لدن عليم خبير

_______________________

Whether or not you translate it as “beneath” or “after” does not change the fact that the passage is not implying in any way about who should be the successor after Abdul’Baha. I can’t fathom how you can read it in such a matter. Once Muhammad Ali broke the covenant by not recognizing Abdul’Baha it’s a moot point. Muhammad Ali was excommunicated so he can’t be the successor anyway. You need to stop spreading this kind of disinformation. It’s so harmful to your soul that I am deeply saddened for you.
_____________________

It doesn’t imply it. It commands it explicitly:

Verily, God hath ordained the station of the Greater Branch after the station of the former. Verily, He is the Ordainer, the Wise. We have surely chosen the Greater after the Greatest as a Command from the All-Knowing, the Omniscient!

____________________

It says station not succession. My station is lower than Abdul’Baha but that doesn’t mean I am to succeed him. The key word is station.
____________________
Baha’i

So what was the point of mentioning Muhammad Ali at all?

____________________

To make sure Muhammad Ali (and everyone else in the family and the community) knew that Muhammad Ali was to obey Abdul’Baha. So that Muhammad Ali would not challenge the successorship after Baha’u’llah’s death, and everyone would turn to Abdul’Baha for leadership and there wouldn’t be a schism.
________________

Baha’i

Wouldn’t it make things clearer to just not mention Muhammad Ali, and just say that everyone was to obey Abdul Baha?

____________________

Clearly Baha’u’llah felt the need to address Muhammad Ali by name specifically so that there would be no doubt or question amongst everyone in the family. I’d recommend you read God Passes Bye which talks quite a bit about the trouble that Muhammad Ali was causing at the time for Abdul’Baha. Later in Abdul’Baha’s ministry, Muhammad Ali went as far as trying to have Abdul’Baha crucified by the Ottomans.
________________________
Well, that was over two months ago. When I found that thread, I decided that FrenchBread needed to be taught a lesson in humility. So I went after him!
Unitarian Universalist

If other Baha’is are anything like YOU in the way you argued with trident here, then clearly those responses in the Baha’i subreddit are not to be trusted.

You said:

There is no such thing as Haifan or Unitarian Bahá’ís. You can’t make things up like that. I can call myself the Wizard of Oz but it doesn’t mean anything.

That’s like saying there is no such thing as a Christian outside the Roman Catholic Church. Don’t be so bigoted! Then you claimed:

[The Kitab-i-Ahd] says the station of Muhammad Ali is beneath that of Abdul’Baha. It says nothing of him succeeding Abdul’Baha. It also says we must obey Abdul’Baha and to turn away from him is like turning away from Baha’u’llah. Abdul’Baha was free to choose his successor and he chose Shoghi Effendi. It’s a done deal. There is nothing to argue.

Do you read the original languages of Baha’u’llah’s writings, Arabic and Persian? Apparently not! When trident tried to correct you with the actual quotation from the passage in question, you simply doubled down on the falsehoods.

Whether or not you translate it as “beneath” or “after” does not change the fact that the passage is not implying in any way about who should be the successor after Abdul’Baha. I can’t fathom how you can read it in such a matter. Once Muhammad Ali broke the covenant by not recognizing Abdul’Baha it’s a moot point. Muhammad Ali was excommunicated so he can’t be the successor anyway. You need to stop spreading this kind of disinformation. It’s so harmful to your soul that I am deeply saddened for you.

Why do you assume Mirza Muhammad-Ali broke the Covenant? Because you believe what was written about him decades after the fact? You weren’t there, so you don’t know what really happened, do you?

The real reason for the dispute between the brothers was because Abdu’l-Baha falsely claimed infallibility for himself after Baha’u’llah made clear in the Kitab-i-Aqdas that NO ONE but God and a Messenger of God could be infallible. He also warned his followers in that book that no one could claim direct revelation from God for 1000 years after his time. Abdu’l-Baha’s claim about himself made it look like he was equal to his father and that made Muhammad-Ali think Abdu’l-Baha violated the Covenant. And once the Covenant was broken, the obligation to obey Abdu’l-Baha became irrelevant. Abdu’l-Baha was just as bound to the rules of his father as Muhammad-Ali was. Having Muhammad-Ali act as a check on Abdu’l-Baha’s absolute power was actually a wise thing for Baha’u’llah to do, in hindsight. Too bad most Baha’is, including you, have chosen to ignore the actual facts about Baha’u’llah’s own teachings. Instead, you use talking points that really don’t make sense. Trident did say:

Wouldn’t it make things clearer to just not mention Muhammad Ali, and just say that everyone was to obey Abdul Baha?

Obviously, yes! Then you said:

Clearly Baha’u’llah felt the need to address Muhammad Ali by name specifically so that there would be no doubt or question amongst everyone in the family.

Because……if Abdu’l-Baha was caught breaking the Covenant, Muhammad-Ali would have the right to challenge him by the authority given to him by both the Kitab-i-Aqdas and the Kitab-i-Ahd. And THAT’S WHAT HE DID!

And as for this final claim of yours:

Later in Abdul’Baha’s ministry, Muhammad Ali went as far as trying to have Abdul’Baha crucified by the Ottomans.

That’s absurd! And when did the Ottoman Empire ever crucify people?

It’s only natural for Shoghi Effendi after being made Abdu’l-Baha’s successor to demonize Muhammad-Ali to justify what was done. Therefore, his book God Passes By is not credible. It’s like Joseph Stalin demonizing Leon Trotsky after Stalin became the Soviet dictator, even though Trotsky was also a loyal Communist.

_____________________

The next day after I made that comment, I discovered that FrenchBread had blocked me and my comment had been downvoted by several people. Such pathetic cowardice! But that’s what happens when Haifan Baha’is can’t control the conversation like they can in r/bahai! They run away!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Popular Posts

Total Pageviews

Followers

Blog Archive