Is Mani, a Prophet?

[16Masail]

Please state your answer and reasoning, preferably coupled with quotes from the Writings.

Note: No generic quotes about God sending innumerable Messengers. They are too vague for one could substantiate any idle claimant based on these quotes.

 

[StevePame]

Please state your answer and reasoning, preferably coupled with quotes from the Writings.

Note: No generic quotes about God sending innumerable Messengers. They are too vague for one could substantiate any idle claimant based on these quotes.

I'm curious, what do you hope to get out of this question?

 

[16Masail]

Hello Steve,

I don't believe in Mani and I've already stated my reason in another thread so I'm not here to reiterate my position. Instead, I just want to hear the opinion of other Bahá'is. There are many similarities between Manichaeism and the Bahá'i Faith. One, Manichaeism lasted for a thousand years and the Faith is expected to last for at least a thousand years. Two, both faiths seek to unite Zoroastrianism, Christianity, and Buddhism. Third, both faiths originated in Persia. I should have mentioned that first. lol

 

[Ahanu]

One, Manichaeism lasted for a thousand years and the Faith is expected to last for at least a thousand years.

Many on the forum may not be familiar with Mírzá Abu'l-Faḍl-i-Gulpáygání (1844–1914), who, according to Wikipedia, "was the foremost Baha'i scholar who helped spread the Baha'i Faith in Egypt, Turkmenistan, and the United States". 16 is clearly setting up a debate against Abu'l-Fadl's Fará'id (The Peerless Gems), a defense against attacks on Baha'u'llah's major theological work called the Kitáb-i-Íqán. In reality, our newcomer is starting an argument against both works. After The Peerless Gems' publication, Muslims responded. It's strange that a "Baha'i" would mention Muslim criticisms specifically and try to defend them, but okay . . .

There are two reasons I have chosen to respond. First, I think students of religion on interfaith.org will find Abu'l-Fadl's work interesting. The Fará'id has yet to be translated, but there is an article about it online. I'll post an excerpt of a summary of Abu'l-Fadl's response to a high level Muslim cleric. The Muslim cleric tries to "turn the table" on Abu'l-Fadl. Check it out:

Abu'l-Fadl has answered most of the major criticisms in the Fará'id itself. In fact, the sections where Abu'l-Fadl is defending and consolidating the dalíl-i-taqrír are some of the most exciting segments of the Fará'id. The Chief Islamic cleric of the Caucasus had already raised the following point in rebuttal to a Bahá'í disputant. It is quoted in the Fará'id.

Allow me to express myself more clearly. What if one of the idolaters addresses us publicly and says: O People of Islam, O people of Christendom, O people of Moses, and O followers of all true religions! Why have ye all been deceived! Why do you not return to the one true path? Do you not see that idolatry has encompassed the earth? Do you not see that we have more than four hundred million followers in China alone? This is none other than that innate spiritual sovereignty with which our precious founder was endowed! The truth of his words influenced and changed hearts day by day, such as you see today. Therefore, if by sovereignty one intends spiritual sovereignty and ascendancy, which takes place gradually, then it follows that idolatry must be true as well! [72]​

The point of the Shaykh is well-made. He attempts to turn the table on Abu'l-Fadl and give him some of his own medicine. If the Bahá'ís can use establishment as a proof, so can the idolaters! Abu'l-Fadl's genius and originality, however, is striking. Abu'l-Fadl has already maintained that God proves His Religion through establishment. Therefore, once the people of a religion deny the dalíl-i-taqrír and reject a Messenger of God they have effectively lost the only universal standard by which they can validate their religion. They will then be no longer be able to defend their religion against external attacks, and are vulnerable. Small wonder then that the Shaykh ul-Islám cannot respond to the idolater. Abu'l-Fadl states that now that the Muslims have rejected the Bahá'í Revelation they can no longer answer this and other challenges in order to defend Islam.

If this question is raised to the people of Islam, you can in no wise answer them. In no way can their falsehood and your truth be proven,

because it is impossible that a people of religion should be able to defend their own religion, once they have rejected truth![73]​

Once the dalíl-i-taqrír is rejected, Abu'l-Fadl maintains that no religion can be proven. Elsewhere in the Fará'id, he goes on to prove that the Chinese religions are not idolatry, but rather Religions revealed by God. He painstakingly proves from the Qur'án the Bahá'í teaching that all peoples of the world, including the Chinese, must have been recipients of Divine guidance, in the form of Revelation.

Note Abu'l-Fadl's belief concerning Chinese religions. Unfortunately, I don't have a translation to know what he said. Since I'm interested in Chinese culture, I would love to know from an authoritative translation!

Anyway, that's all I have to say in this thread. Second, I want to show others how Muslims criticized early Baha'i works.

 

[16Masail]

Ahanu,

What will I do with these false accusations? I could ignore them but it hinders discussion and worst of all, portrays the Faith in a bad light. Here are two Bahá'is who can't have a discussion without one calling the other an infidel. Nevertheless, I'll always forgive and love you. Keep well, brother.

 

[16Masail]

Since I'm the only contributor, I might as well provide my explanation as to why I believe Mani is not a Prophet in eyes of the Faith.

Regarding your question concerning Joseph Smith and the 'Book of Mormon'; as the Bahá’í Teachings quite clearly outline the succession of Prophets from the days of Christ as being Muhammad, the Báb, and finally Bahá’u’lláh, it is obvious that Joseph Smith is not a Manifestation of God.

(Light of Guidance, #1727)

Even though this quote is about Joseph Smith, the rationale behind him not being considered a Prophet is that "the succession of Prophets from the days of Christ as being Muhammad, the Báb, and finally Bahá'u'lláh." Since Mani preached his message after the days of Christ and before Muhammad, my understanding is that this rules him out.

 

[Ahanu]

Even though this quote is about Joseph Smith, the rationale behind him not being considered a Prophet is that "the succession of Prophets from the days of Christ as being Muhammad, the Báb, and finally Bahá'u'lláh."

I responded to this in a private message to a few forum members. Have a nice day!