Scott, Wikipedia is not at all a reliable source, so I am going to disregard your referencing it. There are absolutely no accurate statements of Azal supporting the idea that he vacillated his claims. This is absolutely ridiculous and hypocritical, because Baha constantly changed his claims, going back in forth between whatever suited him at the particular time.
Baha very clearly attempted to kill Subh-i-Azal, and he also ordered the murder of Dayyan as well as many others. This is attested to by both Bayani sources (Hasht Bihisht and Tanbihun Naimin), Christian sources (Wilson and Miller), Gobineau, etc. There are numerous other assassination attempts perpetrated by Baha’is supported by Baha which you can read about. As you can see Baha and Abbas Effendi condoned the murders of Bayanis in Acre (Assassinations by Baha's Men).
Azal himself was also persecuted and exiled for his religion, so that point is void.
Azal gives his testimony that Baha stole books from him to E.G. Browne, and this fact is supported by numerous Bayani sources. It is immovable fact since Baha’is themselves mention the instance of them accidentally publishing his works in the Baha’i publication, Payam-i-Baha’i.
Your statements about the number of Bayanis and people abandoning Azal are null, void, and a non-argument, not addressing the actual theological positions of the Bayani community.
The accounts of the proposed “divine showdown” between Baha and Azal in the mosque are contradictory and cannot be taken as fact (Baha'i Allegations Against Subh-i Azal).
All of Subh-i-Azal’s books in our possession are freely available on the internet in their original language on bayanic.com. Most of his works are lengthy books, comparable to the Qur’an, while most of Baha’s tablets, especially those later in his life, constitute short tablets. Subh-i-Azal retained his vigour and was able to produce fantastic works from his time as a teenager and young man all the way to the end of his life.
It is very doubtful that the Iqan was actually fully the work of Baha and many accounts testify to the fact that it was largely plagiarized from Azal. Nonetheless, the Kitab-i-Iqan does not come close to the wisdom of such men as Ibn Arabi, Mulla Sadra, or Rumi who Baha constantly plagiarized from (Compare his Seven Valleys and Four Valleys with Sadra’s Four Journeys), and they in no regard can touch the level of knowledge in Subh-i-Azal’s work. Baha in every page of his books demonstrates his basic level of knowledge of theology and at times directly contradicts the Bayan (He does this in his Lawh-i-Salman which is in direct contradiction with Persian Bayan 4:4), and he lacks knowledge of the most basic esoteric concepts, not to mention his even more basic comprehension of the Bayan. Subh-i-Azal in all his works is well-demonstrated as being extremely well-versed in the Bayan and esotericism, as befitting of the successor of such a wonderful mystic as the Primal Point.
Now, as for the updates to your question.
The nine years passages do not mention He Whom God shall make manifest. The truth about those passages is explained here (The Primal Point’s Tablet For Azim)
The only connection Baha has to the next set of passages is the word Baha and nothing else. Neither the title of Baha or Baha’u’llah were conferred on him by the Point, but rather the title of Baha’u’llah belongs to Qurrat al-Ayn (Baha's Grounds of Pretension).
So many of these common Baha’i “proofs” from Bayan have long been debunked by Bayanis. You would see so if you took the time to investigate the truth fully. I have yet to see a unique Baha’i argument derived from the verses of the Bayan to support the claim that Baha was He Whom God shall make manifest.
Baha’s role at the Conference of Badasht was largely insignificant. This is yet another way in which the Baha’is have distorted history; and he did not attain the holy remains of the Primal Point. These were forwarded to Subh-i-Azal who buried them with his own hands, and this fact is corroborated by multiple sources and evidence. The Baha’is have yet to prove that the corpse in their possession is actually the Primal Point.
And the Primal Point instructed Mulla Husayn himself to practice taqiyya:
“"It is incumbent upon you not to divulge, either to your companions or to any other soul, that which you have seen and heard. Be engaged in the Masjid-i-Ilkhani in prayer and in teaching. I, too, will there join you in congregational prayer. Beware lest your attitude towards Me betray the secret of your faith. You should continue in this occupation and maintain this attitude until our departure for Hijaz” (The Dawn-Breakers, p. 63). This is a Baha’i history which all Baha’is are required to take as Gospel. It is not a Bayani source.
Bayanis are not seeking to produce as many martyrs as possible which seems to be what the UHJ is trying to do with Baha’is in Iran, revoking them of Baha’i membership if they lie in order to leave the country. As the Prophet Muhammad stated, the ink of the scribe is more sacred than the blood of the martyr. This is a clear distinction between Bayanis and Baha’is. While we have dedicated ourselves to preserving and promulgating the Bayan, being scribes, Baha’is have made themselves into a cult of martyrs. They have even taken martyrs from other religions and appropriated them as their own, which is completely disrespectful to their memory!
It was also said by a renowned Muslim scholar (paraphrasing): “It is easy to die the death of a martyr, but it is not easy to live the life of a martyr.” The latter is what Bayanis have been doing, who have been much nobler than Baha and his followers.
Source : https://www.quora.com/Who-is-the-promised-one-of-Babi-Faith-Subh-i-Azal-Bahaullah-or-someone-yet-to-come/answer/Sarai-Mills/comment/40807064
No comments:
Post a Comment