Website Suggestion

The problem is Ruth you're basing your assumptions on your unproven conspiracy theory which is also based on innuendo .. A single handwriting expert who commences his analysis with the statement that "any conclusions must be "provisional" and the animus directed at the Guardian of the Faith.

Ask yourself why was Ruth White not successful seventy some years ago..? It was unsuccessful then and it remains unsucceessful.
 
arthra said:
The problem is Ruth you're basing your assumptions on your unproven conspiracy theory which is also based on innuendo .. A single handwriting expert who commences his analysis with the statement that "any conclusions must be "provisional" and the animus directed at the Guardian of the Faith.

Ask yourself why was Ruth White not successful seventy some years ago..? It was unsuccessful then and it remains unsucceessful.
Click to expand...

"Assumptions." The evidence that Shoghi Effendi and his family subverted the interpretation of Abdul-Baha is not based on "assumption." It's based on documentary evidence, which the subverters have always tried to ignore and discredit, in much the same way that you have thus far done throughout this thread so far.

"Unproven conspiracy theory." I have not used the expression "conspiracy theory" nor "innuendo." That's a common way apologists use to attempting to discredit someone when they can't refute the ideas and evidence against them. It's basically a form of *ad hominem.*

"Single handwriting expert." Another attempt to discredit Dr. C. Ainsworth Mitchell, of the British Museum, not an insignificant institution, especially back in the 1920s. You seem to suggest there should be more than one analysis but the fact remains that Shoghi Effendi and the illegitimate house of justice based on the forgery have always prevented further examination of the document, because he and they obviously knew and know its bogus.

"Any conclusions must be "provisional." Dr. Mitchell's phrasing and careful qualification is that of a reputable scientist, not someone unqualified from the street merely spouting opinions. That's why his opinion was and remains significant. That's why his extensive research in forensic science, including the analysis of ink, paper, and technical details of forgery remain respected by professionals within the legal community and continue to be cited in academic circles and court room proceedings, as can be verified easily by anyone at Google Scholar:

[CITATION] C HAPTER II OILS AND FATS
CA Mitchell - Recent Advances in Analytical Chemistry, 2007 - Barton Pr
Related articles
[CITATION] Cordage and Cordage Hemp and Fibres
P Kilgour - 2008 - Read Books
Related articles
Medico-Legal Society Centenary Dinner
M Brahams - Medico-Legal Journal, 2001 - mlj.rsmjournals.com
... 1927–28 Sir William Willcox KCIE CB CMG MD FRCP 1928–33 The Rt Hon Lord Riddell
1933–35 Sir Bernard Spilsbury FRCP 1935–37 C Ainsworth Mitchell DSc FRIC 1937–39 The
Rt Hon Mr Justin Humphries 1939–42 G Roche Lynch OBE MB BS FRIC ...
BL Direct
[CITATION] The Mammoth Book of Murder and Science
R Wilkes - 2000 - Running Press
Library Search

"C. Ainsworth Mitchell" - Google Scholar

"Animus." The allegation that Ruth White or anyone else who believes the purported will is bogus is merely motivated by "animus" against the so-called "guardian," a Shiite imamate essentially, is once again a tactic of avoidance and obscuring what's at issue. It attempts to conceal and defend the crime committed by basically smearing the person, once again, against the person, ad hominem.

Ninety years after the crime, Ruth White's testimony and evidence remains and endures, so I for one would not call that unsuccessful at all. Quite the reverse. Knowledge of the crime continues to spread, especially as many people, in many countries, continue to realize there is something very fundamentally wrong about what claims to be the "Baha'i Faith."
 
So, according to Ruth White, Munírih Khánum (1848-1938), the wife of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, was also involved in this so-called forgery scandal.

Hmm . . .

The character of many people are being called into question here. That is, if you accept the Reform Baha'i view.
 
Ahanu said:
So, according to Ruth White, Munírih Khánum (1848-1938), the wife of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, was also involved in this so-called forgery scandal.

Hmm . . .

The character of many people are being called into question here. That is, if you accept the Reform Baha'i view.
Click to expand...


So you imagine no human being is above suspicion? That evidence shouldn't be independently evaluated by reliable authorities, such judges and elected officials that represent the best interest of the community?

It is a fact that Abdul-Baha did not provide for any way of support for Munírih Khánum after his death. Much of the family was worldly and corrupt, as Ruth White observed and describes below:

FROM Correspondence between the High Commissioner of Palestine and Ruth White, regarding the alleged Will of Sir Abdul Baha Abbas. By Ruth White March, 1932:

"I have submitted the photographs of the alleged will to Dr. C. Ainsworth Mitchell, the renowned English handwriting expert; and editor of The Analyst, at 85 Eccleston Square London, S.W.1. and his report shows that this document is fraudulent. No part of it was written by Abdul Baha, although Shoghi Effendi, and the family of Sir Abdul Baha assert that every word of its ten pages was written by Sir Abdul Baha. Shoghi Effendi ignored my request for permission to send a handwriting expert to Haifa to examine the original document.

"...all of Abdul Baha's family share in the tax that is derived from the powers granted in this alleged will."

Ruth White. Abdul Baha's Questioned Will and Testament. Beverly Hills: White, 1946:

"For his family, with the exception of his wife and sister, were the average types with a strong bent toward organized religion, whereas Abdul-Baha was universal, "super-racial and undogmatic.""

"It is important for those who are interested in the Bahai Religion to free themselves from the idea that the family of Abdul-Baha is a "Holy Family." In fact his family, and "in-laws," with the exception of his wife and sister, were somewhat materialistic, and viewed the religion more or less as a little family affair with a strong bent toward organization. For years they have indoctrinated, more or less, the pilgrims who visited the home of Abdul-Baha, myself included, with this conception of religion. This partly nullified the great universal teachings. The result was that when Abdul-Baha passed from this world in November, 1921, some of his family, who had laid the ground-work for organization through these pilgrims while he was alive, hastened to establish it more firmly when he died. All this resulted in making the Bahai Movement, under the dictatorship of Shoghi Effendi, an organization which for narrowness and bigotry has no parallel in history except in the dark ages" (31).


Ruth White
 
Ruth White said:
So you imagine no human being is above suspicion?
Click to expand...

No human being is above suspicion, but, since you are a Baha'i, then you accept ‘Abdu’l-Bahá as a role model. Therefore, you must have ran into these words from ‘Abdu’l-Bahá sometime in your life:

"The true marriage of Bahá'í is this, that husband and wife should be united both physically and spiritually, that they may ever improve the spiritual life of each other, and may enjoy everlasting unity throughout all the worlds of God. This is Bahá'í marriage."

Since ‘Abdu’l-Bahá was married to her for around fifty years, they must have improved the spiritual life of each other quite significantly. If Munírih Khánum was to commit this act you hold her responsible for, then this naturally brings into question another person's character: ‘Abdu’l-Bahá.

If what you say is true, then ‘Abdu’l-Bahá should not be a role model for Baha'is, for what the Master says above does not reflect the way he lived his life. This would make him a hypocrite, because Munírih Khánum would then not reflect the spiritual life of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá.

Therefore, for Reform Baha'is, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá does not serve as a role model, huh?
 
The last few paragraphs clearly quote Ruth White's references to Munírih Khánum:

"For his family, with the exception of his wife and sister..."

"In fact his family, and "in-laws," with the exception of his wife and sister, were somewhat materialistic, and viewed the religion more or less as a little family affair with a strong bent toward organization."

"...partly nullified the great universal teachings."

Ruth White
Ruth White

I'm a member of the Reform Bahai Faith. We don't follow the cult practices of the Haifan denomination, like "takfir," identifying and denouncing others as infidels (kufir) and apostates, taqlid, "blind obedience," issuing fatwas, and so forth. All that started with the fraudulent will and testament of Shoghi Effendi and his family... Abdul-Baha clearly taught such reprehensible tactics were things of the past.
 
And we see that Munírih Khánum did not say the Will and Testament was a fraudulent writing. She also supported Shoghi Effendi.

Munírih Khánum also writes about how Bahá'u'lláh saw her:

Following Bahá'u'lláh's wish, one of the Bahá'ís arrived in Persia, and later passed through Isfahán to spread the Call of God. A great feast was made for him, and all the believers gathered round, and asked him eagerly for news from the Holy Land, and of the Holy Family, and of the believers in prison in Akka.

My uncle's wife said to him, "While you were in the Presence of Bahá'u'lláh, did you ever hear any girl spoken of or chosen for the Master, Abdu'l-Bahá?"

He said, "No; but one day, Bahá'u'lláh was walking in the men's room and speaking. He turned His face to me, and He said, 'I had a wonderful dream last night of the beautiful girl living in Tihrán, whose hand we asked in marriage for 'Abdu'l-Bahá; her face became dark and hidden; and at the same moment, the face of another girl appeared, whose face and heart was bright. We have chosen her to become the wife of 'Abdu'l-Bahá.' Except for these words from Bahá'u'lláh, I have heard nothing."

Elsewhere she writes:

I continued to live in the house of Kalim for nearly five months. I visited Bahá'u'lláh many times, and each time I returned to my home. Whenever Kalim returned from visiting Bahá'u'lláh, he would tell me of His infinite gifts, and bring to me a material gift from Him. One day he arrived with great happiness in his face; he said:

"I have brought a most wonderful gift for you - a new name has been given you; 'Munirih' - Illumined."

Immediately I remembered Bahá'u'lláh's dream of the girl, who became ill; how her colour faded until she left this earthly world; and then another girl appeared with a bright face, a spiritual heart, and she was chosen to be the wife of Abdu'l-Bahá.

Clearly Bahá'u'lláh saw her as a holy woman, but Reformed Baha'is do not.

According to Reformed Baha'is, Munírih Khánum knew the Will and Testament was not written by her husband, then supported Shoghi Effendi in his criminal act.
 
As the title of this thread, "Website Suggestion" suggests, it was created by Fardin9 for discussion of something other than the fraudulent will and testament of the Haifan Baha'i denomination.

I'll post my subsequent responses to a properly titled thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top