![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 |
Can this sentence be revised reworked or omitted? The sentence states: “At the heart of Bahá'í teachings is the goal of a unified world order that ensures the prosperity of all nations, races, creeds, and classes.[6][7]”
It seems it’s an opinion that a unified world order is 1. at the heart of the Bahá’í teachings and 2. that it is it’s goal.
1 Why for example, is peace not stated to be at the heart of the Bahá’í teachings or the age of maturity of the entire human race? The stages of peace are written about in depth. As well as the roles of justice and unity in the establishment and emergence of peace.
2. As to a world order being the goal, to quote Shoghi Effendi in World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, chapter titled, World Unity the Goal:
“Unification of the whole of mankind is the hall-mark of the stage which human society is now approaching. ... The unity of the human race, as envisaged by Bahá’u’lláh, implies the establishment of a world commonwealth in which all nations, races, creeds and classes...”
A world commonwealth is implied and encompassed by the goal of world unity. -All of which having to do with peace and how the stages of peace emerge.
The implication of the sentence now could be interpreted as a religion whose goal is to impose a world government. (Bahá’í writings say the lesser peace will occur after nation states on their own accord will unite)
In general, there is no context or other teachings other than progressive revelation in the section (or much of the page) and then the last sentence talks about establishing a world order as the goal at the heart of the religion, which itself is an opinion and the citations to support it aren’t from recognized authoritative writings of the Bahá’í Faith.
Could it be revised reworked or omitted? Wordsaresounds ( talk) 13:31, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
Daniel, nothing is being censored. You're trying to introduce the concept you think is most important to the first sentence of the article. It's an issue of weight, and the preponderance of sources do not mention your viewpoint in a summary of the religion. Check out WP:UNDUE for more details. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 15:14, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
Yet again, Wikipedia looks towards people who label themselves as Muslims or those who state they are practicing Islam, and totally ignores the source of Islam, which is the Quran.
The article states that "Islamic" countries such as Egypt and Iran have been known to persecute people of the Bahá'í faith, right? Let's break this down this statement in its relevance to Islam. 1. Egypt, Iran and et al, label themselves as Islamic. 2. The article states that these countries, who are Islamic, perform the said actions of persecution. 3. Finally, by saying these countries who are Islamic, are doing Islamic things, you are saying that their actions are part of Islam.
In actual fact, the Quran makes clear, that there is no compulsion in religion, and each to their own faith. This is the actual Islamic view on other people having their own religions and practicing their own faith.
This concept of labelling something Islamic, is similar to what is said about ISIL/ISIL, as in yes, you can call them the Islamic state in context because that is what they call themselves, but to call their actions as Islamic is another matter. You cannot say, well, they call their actions as Islamic therefore they must be right, or their word is the final say on the matter, the religious scriptures are, as in the Quran.
My proposition is that you label them as just "countries" or countries who refer to themselves as Islamic, (or something similar) especially if you are trying to be factual. Again, there should be no problem with pointing out that these countries refer to themselves as Islamic, and anything written in the point of view of the country and its government, but when you say "Islamic" to something that is not part of Islam you are encorcing the idea that these actions are art of Islam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marccarran ( talk • contribs) 23:20, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Regarding this edit. The lead should be concise and doesn't need to be overly detailed. The original wording <<Established by Baháʼu'lláh in 1863, it initially grew in Persia and parts of the Middle East, where it has faced ongoing persecution since its inception.>> was carefully laid out to incorporate some key details as concisely as possible without getting involved in the technicality of starting in Baghdad among Persian exiles. It gets across the Who? Where? When? and mentions the persecution faced in Iran today. The phrase "initially grew in Persia" gets across that it has Persian origins, but doesn't get into the detail of where the announcement was made to break with the Babi tradition and start a new faith. Also, Baha'is consider the Bab's declaration in Shiraz as their origin. The first paragraph needs to hit a bunch of high level points without detail, keep nice sentence flow, stay technically accurate with the split between the two faiths. All the details are below in the article, it's just a question of priority and style.
If you want to change it, please get a consensus on the talk page. I don't think adding "in Baghdad, Iraq" and splitting the sentence is an improvement. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 21:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
THe process of forming a religion occured in phases. The original experience arose out of Babi history and occurred in the Siyah Chal, then there was the declaration to a few chosen people as remembered in the Ridvan event, and then more publicly in Ottoman Turkey, and then the laws and broad teachings of the religion were set for in Ottoman Palestine. No single event stands alone but it clearly originated in Persia and progressed through significant degrees in stages. Smkolins ( talk) 13:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
[btw the "individual Babis" seems fine by me] Smkolins ( talk) 17:10, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
I hate to rehash this more, but I think there are 4 parts to the forming of the Baha'i Faith as a unique religion (from the perspective of Baha'is, of course). 1844, Shiraz; 1852-53, Siyah-chal; 1863, Baghdad; and 1867-68, Adrianople. It wasn't until the last one that anyone started calling themselves "Baha'is", and it was in Adrianople that Baha'u'llah's declaration was "public" in the form of letters and declarations to outside of the Babis. All four of those events were significant movements toward an independent religion. The one I hear most quoted from Baha'is is 1844. The clock for the 1000 years without other prophets started in October 1852. The announcement in Baghdad was the first time he mentioned it to anyone, but it wasn't until 1868 that it was clear to all that it was its own religion. Now, what goes in the lead? 19th century is fine, cause you're looking for the high level view, and the reader doesn't know if it started 1,000 years ago or 10 years ago. Perspective. Just don't go trying to fill the first paragraph with unnecessary details. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 03:59, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
This article, which used to reference the concept in the Baha'i faith, has been changed to redirect to a more general topic (Theophany). The Baha'i article has not been lost in this - as I feared for a moment it had, but renamed as Manifestation of God (Baháʼí Faith). This is apparently NPOV and "good faith" in itself - but it does result in many references throughout the articles on the Faith to the general subject of theophany, most of which, at least, are not helpful. I have fixed this is one or two articles, but clearly there is some more work to be done. -- Soundofmusicals ( talk) 01:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
___ Soundofmusicals ( talk) 05:05, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, just wanted to touch base about two apparent problems with the lead before making changes.
Thanks, Gazelle55 ( talk) 15:35, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi
Cuñado,
This sentence "Baha'i Faith is a new religion teaching the essential worth of all religions." has POV issues. Can you please share the source of this sentence? Neither dictionary.com says that nor the Encyclopedia Britannica! Furthermore, you are using a dictionary definition in the lead section of an important article. See
WP:DICTS. FYI, dictionary.com explicitly states in its terms and conditions found here:
https://www.dictionary.com/e/terms/ that "NEITHER DICTIONARY, NOR ANY OF ITS AFFILIATES.... MAKE ANY WARRANTY... AS TO THE ACCURACY, RELIABILITY, COMPLETENESS..." then why don't you use a more reliable source! If that is not possible let the citation be tagged with
unreliable source?. Thanks.
Serv181920 (
talk) 16:41, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
I think the tension Serv181920 is getting at is that Baha'is teach the divine origin of other religions, but also that in their current forms they are corrupted and should be replaced with the Baha'i Faith. So mentioning the unity part but not the condemnation of the current forms part could be seen as misleading. That said, the sources focus on the teaching of the unity of religion so I think the article should reflect that—as always, it's not our judgement to make. I don't see why "essential worth of all religions" is more pro-Baha'i than "unity of religion," so I don't see an issue with using it given it's a bit easier to understand. The article body should reflect the details of the Baha'i view, though. Gazelle55 ( talk) 22:31, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
WHERE are all the talk page archives for this article? (Deleted?/ by whom? / WHY??)..
Thanks! 2A02:120B:2C26:79C0:4E3C:16FF:FE2A:C48E ( talk) 05:42, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
There is no mention of Baha'i denominations in this article. There should be a small mention of Remiyites and other small groups. What do you think? Serv181920 ( talk) 10:01, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
According to Balch (sociologist from University of Montana who studied this group in-person for 15 years) in "Fifteen Years of Failed Prophecy" (Routledge, 1997), "Since 1980 membership in the BUPC has fluctuated considerably, but it probably never exceeded 200 nationwide, despite Jensen's claims of having thousands of followers around the world. In 1994, the last year for which we have a membership list, there were only sixty-six members in Montana and fewer than twenty in other states. The Wyoming and Arkansas contingents disbanded after the 1980 disconfirmation, but new groups were formed in Minnesota and Wisconsin... By 1990 the group probably had fewer than 100 members nationwide... the defection rate accelerated in the 1990s..." Cuñado ☼ - Talk 22:58, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
The recent "The Baha'i Faith, Violence and Non-violence" (pp 36-37) by Cambridge University Press clearly says that the Baha'i faith does not have any sects, there has been a few splinter groups each usually with less than 100 people in them but they usually were short-lived. Also Moomen says in this work (published by Religion) that the groups cannot really be considered sects as they are not creating alternative ways of being a Baha'i, with functioning alternative communities. Their main purpose is opposing the mainline community and the appointed authority. Tarikhejtemai ( talk) 00:54, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
The title of this article looks like the ' and í are smushed together. Therefore it kind of looks like a blob above the i. It's it possible to fix?
Thx, Scalyhawk121534 ( talk) 17:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Surely the article requires a section about criticism and controversy. For examp0le claiming to be liberal and enlightened but placing numerous conservative rtestriuctions on followers has been something mentioned by several ex-bahais, yet their voices aren't being added here. Also, for many arabs they are seen as traitors, for being an islam-originated and iranian religion that now chooses to make its headquarters in Israel, which is a big explicit cause of its exclusion in Iran and Iraq. The main mantainer of this article seems to be a hardcore promoter of the religion which goes against wikiedías conflict of interest policies (see: Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest. -- 186.141.135.203 ( talk) 21:41, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
I agree with IP editor above and Serv: A section at the bottom should be included to report about the many controversies surrounding this Faith/Sect. I notice that Baha'i talk-page Archives no. 17 & 18 (e.g. section: "FA?") have similar comments by many other editors. Cheers! 172.58.236.41 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Please forgive me if it all seems a bit "incoherent" because there are MULTIPLE persons sitting behind this computer or editing this thread (I personally work from 9-5pm E.T) 😀 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.236.248 ( talk) 19:44, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Peter Smith wrote this as part of a summary of the Baha'i Faith for Virginia Commonwealth University:
IV. ISSUES AND CHALLENGES The Baha’i Faith is now a worldwide movement and the challenges which face Baha’i communities in one part of the world may be quite different from those in another. For the Baha’is in the Middle East the key issue is religious freedom. In Iran, the Baha’is have faced an ongoing campaign of persecution ever since the Islamic Revolution of 1979. Despite being the largest religious minority in the country, they have faced waves of arrests of their leaders and many of their most active members – around 200 of whom have been murdered and executed; the banning of all their activities; and the attempt to totally exclude them from all aspects of civic life (including education and the burial of their dead). Considerable difficulties have also been encountered by the Egyptian Baha’is, who have also been denied many civil rights.
By contrast, whilst the Baha’is in the West have often been able to gain considerable public attention and sympathy, their numbers have generally remained small, leading to anxieties in some circles about the failure to achieve a greater impact. Small but very vocal groups of Western Baha’is have also expressed discontent over Baha’i practices which they deem illiberal, notably the restriction of membership of the Universal House of Justice to men and the prohibition on homosexual activity (including marriage). Intellectual tensions have also surfaced about ‘academic’ interpretations of the Faith.
It is very difficult to make any generalizations about the very diverse Baha’i communities of the ‘Third World’. In a number there are certainly practical challenges in consolidating a national Baha’i community with limited resources and in dealing with harsh social realities – including the displacement of refugees, poverty and crime. [1]
His summary is carefully worded. The issues that I mentioned (women on House and homosexuality) are generally concerns for western Baha'is and non-issues elsewhere. The academic issues are "tensions" and extremely limited in scope. A section focusing on negative viewpoints needs a carefully thought-out title (i.e. not 'criticism'), and several reliable references stating what are the major points of tension, similar to Smith's summary. The weight of the issues/challenges/criticism needs to be proportional to it's appearance in the preponderance of reliable sources. Keep in mind Jimbo Wales' comment that "[criticism sections] are a symptom of bad writing. That is, it isn't that we should not include the criticisms, but that the information should be properly incorporated throughout the article rather than having a troll magnet section of random criticisms." Cuñado ☼ - Talk 06:08, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Let's start w/more *serious* or verified stuff/FACTS:
"List of high ranking Iranian officials referred in the above: Hoveyda, thse Shah’s 13-year Prime Minister as well as Minister of the Imperial Court and Minister of Finance; Mehri Rasekh, Farah’s boon companion; Gen. Abdol Karim Ayadi, the Shah’s special physician, who held 23 high-ranking government jobs; Gen. Ali Mohammad Khademi; Gen. Sani’ee, Minister of War; Habib Sabet and Hojabr Yazdani, two major economic supports and two financial arms of the Zionists in Iran; Mansoor Rohani, the Shah’s minister for 13 years; Mrs Farokhrou Parsa, Minister of Education and holder of tens of other jobs; Shapour Rasekh, the Shah’s sincere advisor; Hossein Amanat, the famous capitalist, designer and executor of the Shahyad Monument; Parviz Sabeti, Director of Internal Security of the Shah’s security police; Lili Amir-Arjomand, trainer of the Shah' children."
I know some of those people personally😀 THEY ARE INDEED ***BAHA'Is***...
assertions, include that Hoveyda (who was the prime minister of the late Shah of Iran), was of Baha'i extraction and a freemason. Moreover, Hoveyda had many ministers of Baha'i *extraction* (despite the fact that there were not many Baha'is relative to Iran's general population) at that time." 172.58.236.36 ( talk) 05:03, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello friends, can we add this sentence to the lead paragraph?
"It is not a cult, a reform movement or sect within any other religion." [1] Serv181920 ( talk) 17:42, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
References
Baháʼí beliefs are sometimes described as syncretic combinations of earlier religious beliefs.[37] Baháʼís, however, assert that their religion is a distinct tradition with its own scriptures, teachings, laws, and history.[30][38] The religion was initially seen as a sect of Islam because of its belief in the prophethood of Muhammad and in the authenticity and veracity of the Qur’an.[39] Most religious specialists now see it as an independent religion, with its religious background in Shiʻa Islam being seen as analogous to the Jewish context in which Christianity was established.[40] Muslim institutions and clergy, both Sunni and Shi'a, consider Baháʼís to be deserters or apostates from Islam, which has led to Baháʼís being persecuted.[41][42] Baháʼís describe their faith as an independent world religion, differing from the other traditions in its relative age and in the appropriateness of Baháʼu'lláh's teachings to the modern context.[43] Baháʼu'lláh is believed to have fulfilled the messianic expectations of these precursor faiths.[44]
Yes, some Christian and Muslim authors. There are newspaper clippings saying that "the leader of Baha'i Cult visits America" and there is at least a PhD Thesis saying that "Baha'i faith is believed to be a cult in Pakistan." and there is an article in "The Guardian" newspaper saying that the "Baha'i faith is not a cult." There are sources, and I can find more sources. Serv181920 ( talk) 12:57, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Completed dissertations or theses written as part of the requirements for a doctorate, and which are publicly available (most via interlibrary loan or from Proquest), can be used but care should be exercised, as they are often, in part, primary sources. Some of them will have gone through a process of academic peer reviewing, of varying levels of rigor, but some will not. If possible, use theses that have been cited in the literature; supervised by recognized specialists in the field; or reviewed by independent parties. Dissertations in progress have not been vetted and are not regarded as published and are thus not reliable sources as a rule. Some theses are later published in the form of scholarly monographs or peer reviewed articles, and, if available, these are usually preferable to the original thesis as sources. Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence.
1. Especially after the death of First Guardian Shoghi Effendi there became two groups. A group accepted the Guardianship of Mason Remey and another accepted the claim of Hands of Cause who stated that Guardianship has ended.
2. Many authors Baha'is as well as Non-Baha'is have written on this topic. For eg: Baha'ism History - by Hutan Hejazi Martinez, Bahais in Exile – By Vernon Elvin Johnson, Religious Leaders of America by J. Gordon Melton and many more.
3. There are many followers of Charles Mason Remey (second Guardian of the Baha'i Faith) and his followers are Baha'is as they believe in Baha’i Faith and its principles and key figures and hence deserve space on this page. Refer to ‘The Baha'i Faith in America’ by William Garlington (2005), Bahais in Exile – By Vernon Elvin Johnson.
4. You can refer to other previous religions like Islam, Christianity, Jew etc. the leadership issue has been discussed and given space. The same should be there on Baha’i Faith page also.-- Asad29591 ( talk) 14:46, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
1. The followers of Second Guardian of Baha'i Faith - Mason Remey are in thousands. Refer to ‘The Baha'i Faith in America’ by William Garlington (2005), Bahais in Exile – By Vernon Elvin Johnson.
2. It is not about minority or majority. Because if that is the case then Baha'is as a whole faith (including mainstream and other sects) does not deserve a page on Wikipedia since since we are overall in minority.
3. Also the First Guardian of the Baha'i Faith our beloved Shoghi Effendi says that the faith cannot be judged in terms of "Numerical Strength”. Refer to World Order of Baha’u’llah, p. 57.
4. Yes there is no doubt that Baha'i Faith is without schism and united but only if it is under the Guardianship.
Shoghi Effendi says:
Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship the World Order of Baha'u'llah would be mutilated and permanently deprived of that hereditary principle which, as ‘Abdw'l-Baha has written, has been invariably upheld by the Law of God... . Without such an institution the integrity of the Faith would be imperiled, and the stability of the entire fabric would be gravely endangered. Its prestige would suffer, the means required to enable it to take a long, an uninterrupted view over a series of generations would be completely lacking, and the necessary guidance to define the sphere of the legislative action of its elected representatives would be totally withdrawn. (The World Order of Baha’u'llah, 1955, p. 148)-- Asad29591 ( talk) 00:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 |
Can this sentence be revised reworked or omitted? The sentence states: “At the heart of Bahá'í teachings is the goal of a unified world order that ensures the prosperity of all nations, races, creeds, and classes.[6][7]”
It seems it’s an opinion that a unified world order is 1. at the heart of the Bahá’í teachings and 2. that it is it’s goal.
1 Why for example, is peace not stated to be at the heart of the Bahá’í teachings or the age of maturity of the entire human race? The stages of peace are written about in depth. As well as the roles of justice and unity in the establishment and emergence of peace.
2. As to a world order being the goal, to quote Shoghi Effendi in World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, chapter titled, World Unity the Goal:
“Unification of the whole of mankind is the hall-mark of the stage which human society is now approaching. ... The unity of the human race, as envisaged by Bahá’u’lláh, implies the establishment of a world commonwealth in which all nations, races, creeds and classes...”
A world commonwealth is implied and encompassed by the goal of world unity. -All of which having to do with peace and how the stages of peace emerge.
The implication of the sentence now could be interpreted as a religion whose goal is to impose a world government. (Bahá’í writings say the lesser peace will occur after nation states on their own accord will unite)
In general, there is no context or other teachings other than progressive revelation in the section (or much of the page) and then the last sentence talks about establishing a world order as the goal at the heart of the religion, which itself is an opinion and the citations to support it aren’t from recognized authoritative writings of the Bahá’í Faith.
Could it be revised reworked or omitted? Wordsaresounds ( talk) 13:31, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
Daniel, nothing is being censored. You're trying to introduce the concept you think is most important to the first sentence of the article. It's an issue of weight, and the preponderance of sources do not mention your viewpoint in a summary of the religion. Check out WP:UNDUE for more details. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 15:14, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
Yet again, Wikipedia looks towards people who label themselves as Muslims or those who state they are practicing Islam, and totally ignores the source of Islam, which is the Quran.
The article states that "Islamic" countries such as Egypt and Iran have been known to persecute people of the Bahá'í faith, right? Let's break this down this statement in its relevance to Islam. 1. Egypt, Iran and et al, label themselves as Islamic. 2. The article states that these countries, who are Islamic, perform the said actions of persecution. 3. Finally, by saying these countries who are Islamic, are doing Islamic things, you are saying that their actions are part of Islam.
In actual fact, the Quran makes clear, that there is no compulsion in religion, and each to their own faith. This is the actual Islamic view on other people having their own religions and practicing their own faith.
This concept of labelling something Islamic, is similar to what is said about ISIL/ISIL, as in yes, you can call them the Islamic state in context because that is what they call themselves, but to call their actions as Islamic is another matter. You cannot say, well, they call their actions as Islamic therefore they must be right, or their word is the final say on the matter, the religious scriptures are, as in the Quran.
My proposition is that you label them as just "countries" or countries who refer to themselves as Islamic, (or something similar) especially if you are trying to be factual. Again, there should be no problem with pointing out that these countries refer to themselves as Islamic, and anything written in the point of view of the country and its government, but when you say "Islamic" to something that is not part of Islam you are encorcing the idea that these actions are art of Islam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marccarran ( talk • contribs) 23:20, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Regarding this edit. The lead should be concise and doesn't need to be overly detailed. The original wording <<Established by Baháʼu'lláh in 1863, it initially grew in Persia and parts of the Middle East, where it has faced ongoing persecution since its inception.>> was carefully laid out to incorporate some key details as concisely as possible without getting involved in the technicality of starting in Baghdad among Persian exiles. It gets across the Who? Where? When? and mentions the persecution faced in Iran today. The phrase "initially grew in Persia" gets across that it has Persian origins, but doesn't get into the detail of where the announcement was made to break with the Babi tradition and start a new faith. Also, Baha'is consider the Bab's declaration in Shiraz as their origin. The first paragraph needs to hit a bunch of high level points without detail, keep nice sentence flow, stay technically accurate with the split between the two faiths. All the details are below in the article, it's just a question of priority and style.
If you want to change it, please get a consensus on the talk page. I don't think adding "in Baghdad, Iraq" and splitting the sentence is an improvement. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 21:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
THe process of forming a religion occured in phases. The original experience arose out of Babi history and occurred in the Siyah Chal, then there was the declaration to a few chosen people as remembered in the Ridvan event, and then more publicly in Ottoman Turkey, and then the laws and broad teachings of the religion were set for in Ottoman Palestine. No single event stands alone but it clearly originated in Persia and progressed through significant degrees in stages. Smkolins ( talk) 13:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
[btw the "individual Babis" seems fine by me] Smkolins ( talk) 17:10, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
I hate to rehash this more, but I think there are 4 parts to the forming of the Baha'i Faith as a unique religion (from the perspective of Baha'is, of course). 1844, Shiraz; 1852-53, Siyah-chal; 1863, Baghdad; and 1867-68, Adrianople. It wasn't until the last one that anyone started calling themselves "Baha'is", and it was in Adrianople that Baha'u'llah's declaration was "public" in the form of letters and declarations to outside of the Babis. All four of those events were significant movements toward an independent religion. The one I hear most quoted from Baha'is is 1844. The clock for the 1000 years without other prophets started in October 1852. The announcement in Baghdad was the first time he mentioned it to anyone, but it wasn't until 1868 that it was clear to all that it was its own religion. Now, what goes in the lead? 19th century is fine, cause you're looking for the high level view, and the reader doesn't know if it started 1,000 years ago or 10 years ago. Perspective. Just don't go trying to fill the first paragraph with unnecessary details. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 03:59, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
This article, which used to reference the concept in the Baha'i faith, has been changed to redirect to a more general topic (Theophany). The Baha'i article has not been lost in this - as I feared for a moment it had, but renamed as Manifestation of God (Baháʼí Faith). This is apparently NPOV and "good faith" in itself - but it does result in many references throughout the articles on the Faith to the general subject of theophany, most of which, at least, are not helpful. I have fixed this is one or two articles, but clearly there is some more work to be done. -- Soundofmusicals ( talk) 01:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
___ Soundofmusicals ( talk) 05:05, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, just wanted to touch base about two apparent problems with the lead before making changes.
Thanks, Gazelle55 ( talk) 15:35, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi
Cuñado,
This sentence "Baha'i Faith is a new religion teaching the essential worth of all religions." has POV issues. Can you please share the source of this sentence? Neither dictionary.com says that nor the Encyclopedia Britannica! Furthermore, you are using a dictionary definition in the lead section of an important article. See
WP:DICTS. FYI, dictionary.com explicitly states in its terms and conditions found here:
https://www.dictionary.com/e/terms/ that "NEITHER DICTIONARY, NOR ANY OF ITS AFFILIATES.... MAKE ANY WARRANTY... AS TO THE ACCURACY, RELIABILITY, COMPLETENESS..." then why don't you use a more reliable source! If that is not possible let the citation be tagged with
unreliable source?. Thanks.
Serv181920 (
talk) 16:41, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
I think the tension Serv181920 is getting at is that Baha'is teach the divine origin of other religions, but also that in their current forms they are corrupted and should be replaced with the Baha'i Faith. So mentioning the unity part but not the condemnation of the current forms part could be seen as misleading. That said, the sources focus on the teaching of the unity of religion so I think the article should reflect that—as always, it's not our judgement to make. I don't see why "essential worth of all religions" is more pro-Baha'i than "unity of religion," so I don't see an issue with using it given it's a bit easier to understand. The article body should reflect the details of the Baha'i view, though. Gazelle55 ( talk) 22:31, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
WHERE are all the talk page archives for this article? (Deleted?/ by whom? / WHY??)..
Thanks! 2A02:120B:2C26:79C0:4E3C:16FF:FE2A:C48E ( talk) 05:42, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
There is no mention of Baha'i denominations in this article. There should be a small mention of Remiyites and other small groups. What do you think? Serv181920 ( talk) 10:01, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
According to Balch (sociologist from University of Montana who studied this group in-person for 15 years) in "Fifteen Years of Failed Prophecy" (Routledge, 1997), "Since 1980 membership in the BUPC has fluctuated considerably, but it probably never exceeded 200 nationwide, despite Jensen's claims of having thousands of followers around the world. In 1994, the last year for which we have a membership list, there were only sixty-six members in Montana and fewer than twenty in other states. The Wyoming and Arkansas contingents disbanded after the 1980 disconfirmation, but new groups were formed in Minnesota and Wisconsin... By 1990 the group probably had fewer than 100 members nationwide... the defection rate accelerated in the 1990s..." Cuñado ☼ - Talk 22:58, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
The recent "The Baha'i Faith, Violence and Non-violence" (pp 36-37) by Cambridge University Press clearly says that the Baha'i faith does not have any sects, there has been a few splinter groups each usually with less than 100 people in them but they usually were short-lived. Also Moomen says in this work (published by Religion) that the groups cannot really be considered sects as they are not creating alternative ways of being a Baha'i, with functioning alternative communities. Their main purpose is opposing the mainline community and the appointed authority. Tarikhejtemai ( talk) 00:54, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
The title of this article looks like the ' and í are smushed together. Therefore it kind of looks like a blob above the i. It's it possible to fix?
Thx, Scalyhawk121534 ( talk) 17:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Surely the article requires a section about criticism and controversy. For examp0le claiming to be liberal and enlightened but placing numerous conservative rtestriuctions on followers has been something mentioned by several ex-bahais, yet their voices aren't being added here. Also, for many arabs they are seen as traitors, for being an islam-originated and iranian religion that now chooses to make its headquarters in Israel, which is a big explicit cause of its exclusion in Iran and Iraq. The main mantainer of this article seems to be a hardcore promoter of the religion which goes against wikiedías conflict of interest policies (see: Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest. -- 186.141.135.203 ( talk) 21:41, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
I agree with IP editor above and Serv: A section at the bottom should be included to report about the many controversies surrounding this Faith/Sect. I notice that Baha'i talk-page Archives no. 17 & 18 (e.g. section: "FA?") have similar comments by many other editors. Cheers! 172.58.236.41 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Please forgive me if it all seems a bit "incoherent" because there are MULTIPLE persons sitting behind this computer or editing this thread (I personally work from 9-5pm E.T) 😀 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.236.248 ( talk) 19:44, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Peter Smith wrote this as part of a summary of the Baha'i Faith for Virginia Commonwealth University:
IV. ISSUES AND CHALLENGES The Baha’i Faith is now a worldwide movement and the challenges which face Baha’i communities in one part of the world may be quite different from those in another. For the Baha’is in the Middle East the key issue is religious freedom. In Iran, the Baha’is have faced an ongoing campaign of persecution ever since the Islamic Revolution of 1979. Despite being the largest religious minority in the country, they have faced waves of arrests of their leaders and many of their most active members – around 200 of whom have been murdered and executed; the banning of all their activities; and the attempt to totally exclude them from all aspects of civic life (including education and the burial of their dead). Considerable difficulties have also been encountered by the Egyptian Baha’is, who have also been denied many civil rights.
By contrast, whilst the Baha’is in the West have often been able to gain considerable public attention and sympathy, their numbers have generally remained small, leading to anxieties in some circles about the failure to achieve a greater impact. Small but very vocal groups of Western Baha’is have also expressed discontent over Baha’i practices which they deem illiberal, notably the restriction of membership of the Universal House of Justice to men and the prohibition on homosexual activity (including marriage). Intellectual tensions have also surfaced about ‘academic’ interpretations of the Faith.
It is very difficult to make any generalizations about the very diverse Baha’i communities of the ‘Third World’. In a number there are certainly practical challenges in consolidating a national Baha’i community with limited resources and in dealing with harsh social realities – including the displacement of refugees, poverty and crime. [1]
His summary is carefully worded. The issues that I mentioned (women on House and homosexuality) are generally concerns for western Baha'is and non-issues elsewhere. The academic issues are "tensions" and extremely limited in scope. A section focusing on negative viewpoints needs a carefully thought-out title (i.e. not 'criticism'), and several reliable references stating what are the major points of tension, similar to Smith's summary. The weight of the issues/challenges/criticism needs to be proportional to it's appearance in the preponderance of reliable sources. Keep in mind Jimbo Wales' comment that "[criticism sections] are a symptom of bad writing. That is, it isn't that we should not include the criticisms, but that the information should be properly incorporated throughout the article rather than having a troll magnet section of random criticisms." Cuñado ☼ - Talk 06:08, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Let's start w/more *serious* or verified stuff/FACTS:
"List of high ranking Iranian officials referred in the above: Hoveyda, thse Shah’s 13-year Prime Minister as well as Minister of the Imperial Court and Minister of Finance; Mehri Rasekh, Farah’s boon companion; Gen. Abdol Karim Ayadi, the Shah’s special physician, who held 23 high-ranking government jobs; Gen. Ali Mohammad Khademi; Gen. Sani’ee, Minister of War; Habib Sabet and Hojabr Yazdani, two major economic supports and two financial arms of the Zionists in Iran; Mansoor Rohani, the Shah’s minister for 13 years; Mrs Farokhrou Parsa, Minister of Education and holder of tens of other jobs; Shapour Rasekh, the Shah’s sincere advisor; Hossein Amanat, the famous capitalist, designer and executor of the Shahyad Monument; Parviz Sabeti, Director of Internal Security of the Shah’s security police; Lili Amir-Arjomand, trainer of the Shah' children."
I know some of those people personally😀 THEY ARE INDEED ***BAHA'Is***...
assertions, include that Hoveyda (who was the prime minister of the late Shah of Iran), was of Baha'i extraction and a freemason. Moreover, Hoveyda had many ministers of Baha'i *extraction* (despite the fact that there were not many Baha'is relative to Iran's general population) at that time." 172.58.236.36 ( talk) 05:03, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello friends, can we add this sentence to the lead paragraph?
"It is not a cult, a reform movement or sect within any other religion." [1] Serv181920 ( talk) 17:42, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
References
Baháʼí beliefs are sometimes described as syncretic combinations of earlier religious beliefs.[37] Baháʼís, however, assert that their religion is a distinct tradition with its own scriptures, teachings, laws, and history.[30][38] The religion was initially seen as a sect of Islam because of its belief in the prophethood of Muhammad and in the authenticity and veracity of the Qur’an.[39] Most religious specialists now see it as an independent religion, with its religious background in Shiʻa Islam being seen as analogous to the Jewish context in which Christianity was established.[40] Muslim institutions and clergy, both Sunni and Shi'a, consider Baháʼís to be deserters or apostates from Islam, which has led to Baháʼís being persecuted.[41][42] Baháʼís describe their faith as an independent world religion, differing from the other traditions in its relative age and in the appropriateness of Baháʼu'lláh's teachings to the modern context.[43] Baháʼu'lláh is believed to have fulfilled the messianic expectations of these precursor faiths.[44]
Yes, some Christian and Muslim authors. There are newspaper clippings saying that "the leader of Baha'i Cult visits America" and there is at least a PhD Thesis saying that "Baha'i faith is believed to be a cult in Pakistan." and there is an article in "The Guardian" newspaper saying that the "Baha'i faith is not a cult." There are sources, and I can find more sources. Serv181920 ( talk) 12:57, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Completed dissertations or theses written as part of the requirements for a doctorate, and which are publicly available (most via interlibrary loan or from Proquest), can be used but care should be exercised, as they are often, in part, primary sources. Some of them will have gone through a process of academic peer reviewing, of varying levels of rigor, but some will not. If possible, use theses that have been cited in the literature; supervised by recognized specialists in the field; or reviewed by independent parties. Dissertations in progress have not been vetted and are not regarded as published and are thus not reliable sources as a rule. Some theses are later published in the form of scholarly monographs or peer reviewed articles, and, if available, these are usually preferable to the original thesis as sources. Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence.
1. Especially after the death of First Guardian Shoghi Effendi there became two groups. A group accepted the Guardianship of Mason Remey and another accepted the claim of Hands of Cause who stated that Guardianship has ended.
2. Many authors Baha'is as well as Non-Baha'is have written on this topic. For eg: Baha'ism History - by Hutan Hejazi Martinez, Bahais in Exile – By Vernon Elvin Johnson, Religious Leaders of America by J. Gordon Melton and many more.
3. There are many followers of Charles Mason Remey (second Guardian of the Baha'i Faith) and his followers are Baha'is as they believe in Baha’i Faith and its principles and key figures and hence deserve space on this page. Refer to ‘The Baha'i Faith in America’ by William Garlington (2005), Bahais in Exile – By Vernon Elvin Johnson.
4. You can refer to other previous religions like Islam, Christianity, Jew etc. the leadership issue has been discussed and given space. The same should be there on Baha’i Faith page also.-- Asad29591 ( talk) 14:46, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
1. The followers of Second Guardian of Baha'i Faith - Mason Remey are in thousands. Refer to ‘The Baha'i Faith in America’ by William Garlington (2005), Bahais in Exile – By Vernon Elvin Johnson.
2. It is not about minority or majority. Because if that is the case then Baha'is as a whole faith (including mainstream and other sects) does not deserve a page on Wikipedia since since we are overall in minority.
3. Also the First Guardian of the Baha'i Faith our beloved Shoghi Effendi says that the faith cannot be judged in terms of "Numerical Strength”. Refer to World Order of Baha’u’llah, p. 57.
4. Yes there is no doubt that Baha'i Faith is without schism and united but only if it is under the Guardianship.
Shoghi Effendi says:
Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship the World Order of Baha'u'llah would be mutilated and permanently deprived of that hereditary principle which, as ‘Abdw'l-Baha has written, has been invariably upheld by the Law of God... . Without such an institution the integrity of the Faith would be imperiled, and the stability of the entire fabric would be gravely endangered. Its prestige would suffer, the means required to enable it to take a long, an uninterrupted view over a series of generations would be completely lacking, and the necessary guidance to define the sphere of the legislative action of its elected representatives would be totally withdrawn. (The World Order of Baha’u'llah, 1955, p. 148)-- Asad29591 ( talk) 00:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)