Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:25, 11 October 2006

I would be interested to talk with / meet Bayanis. Is it possible for outsiders to covert to Bayanism? I tried signing up for the discussion group (mentioned in the link, bayanic.org) but was turned away without explanation. Otherwise there seem to be no e-mail response links on either site. (The one for Bayan19 got sent back.)

Dear seeker

I am a Bayani and would be glad to answer your questions if I can. Please also see www.bayanic.com . As far as I know it is the only Bayani site with the most comprehensive collection of the Bayanic writings and their point of views on Bahaism.

Please email me on steveblomberg2@yahoo.com if you like to.

In response to your question, I must say yes it is not only possible but is the objective of the religion of Bayan to have as many believers as possible.

The primary requirement is to believe in Sayyid Ali-Muhammad (the Primal Point) as the current manifestation of God and the 18 Letters of the Living of Bayan.

As to the remarks below. The Primal Point announced in 1844 that he was the one promissed of of Islam (i.e. the Shia faction of Islam). He claimed the station of Bab-u'llah (Gate to the knowledge of god). Muslims who by popular belief were waiting for the twelfth Imam to re-appear associated Him with the twelfth Imam which was a mistake.

In the year 5 (Bab in abjad notation = 5) He called Himself the Qaiem (He Who Shall Rise). In the seventh year (1850) He called himself the Primal Point. The Bayanic calendar commences on this year. Please note that there was no change in the nature of his mission. This can be seen in his first writing (Comemntary on Surat-al Youseph).

For more details polease see: http://www.bayanic.com/intro/backg00.html

Regards

Steve -- 155.143.59.43 7 February 2006 12:09 (UTC)

I've never seen someone who claims to be a Bayani on wikipedia, but I guess I see no legitimate reason why you couldn't. I wrote this page just what I knew off my head, so you won't get many Bayanis here anyway. Just to warn you they're really not keen on Baha'is (sort of understandable) so that might be why they turned you away. If you speak farci you might have luck by going to Baha'i accademic sites and asking around (I've never done it so not sure). In particular check http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/ - they seem to have relatively good contact with the Bayani accademic circles, but they might not be keen on any proselytizing on their site. -- Tomhab 29 June 2005 11:34 (UTC)

Thank you! BTW I'm not a Baha'i, and I'm not interested in converting anybody.

Good luck in your search. I don't mean to be pessimistic but I'm not sure how much success you'll have. Its not the most prevalent religion in the west so its presence on the internet isn't really very large. -- Tomhab 1 July 2005 03:44 (UTC)

1848 as against 1844

The Bab had three public claims each greater than the previous - In 1844, he claimed to be the Bab - the gate through which mankind could speak to the hidden Imam, then there were were two further claims that I always mix up, the most important of which was in 1848 where he claimed to abrogate Islamic law. Its mostly ignored by Baha'is as we believe he was always all three and that he was just gradually revealing his message. Also many prominent Babis knew of his claim.

Anyway, the point is it is significant to Bayanis that he only declared publically to abrogate islamic law in 1848. -- Tomhab 7 July 2005 09:43 (UTC)

Baha'i Monopolization of Bayani items on Misplaced Pages

It appears the Baha'i attempts to falsify history and monopolize subject matters related to Babism and the Bayani faith extends to all domains. People should know that the Baha'is are engaged in their typical ahistorical sectarian propaganda tactics on the listed items. I am happy to take this matter as far as it goes to get some kind of objectivity happening.

For the record, the Bab first title claimed was Remembrqnce (dhikr). This whole issue has been dealt with by Browne, Tumanskii, Nicloas and Todd Lawson. It boggles the mind that the Baha'is who are active reverting their propaganda as objective entries do not know this stuff.

-- Curandero101 11 October 2006

This is not the issue with your edits, but more the uncited Recent development section, as well as stating populations exist in Uzbekistan. Do you have any reliable sources for those statements. -- Jeff3000 04:49, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Further, Azal's recent book has almost nothing to do with the Azalis, and he, himself, is not notable. His book is self-published, so it isn't a reliable source, even if you were to cite it. MARussellPESE 04:54, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I just cited you an online source for Uzbekistan. If you want I'll find published harcopy journal material as well. Azal's book is citable and it does not in any way preclude in any manner, shape or form its not being cited. It includes a recent, published history of the Bayanis. But if you would like to cite specific criticisms out of Azal's book and why it does not meet such criteria, by all means, please feel free. -- Curandero101 11 October 2006

This text:

"Earlier in 2004 Australian based Iranian esotericist Wahid Azal had launched a yahoogroups list called Bayan19 specifically dedicated to discussions of the religion of the Bayan. But Wahid Azal's Bayani gnostic universalism reflects a radical antinomian departure from the Bayani creed. It is more of a Sufi and crypto-Isma'ili gnostic reinterpretation of the Bayani faith (with Azal's own ruminations on the mystical philosophy of Ibn Arabi as the background) rather than the Bayani faith in any standard orthodox formulation. His book Liber Decatriarchia Mystica (Library of the Most Great Name, Eastern Coast, Australia: 2006) does however dedicate an entire chapter to the early history of the Bayani faith from a standard Azali perspective."

is a review of Azal's book, and unless a reliable source has reviewed Azal's book, it is original research, which is not allowed. -- Jeff3000 05:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Azal's book is a syncretic Gnostic/Sufi treatise of his. He has no reputation as an expert on Azali topics and his book as self-published is not a reliable source. This information is useless for the article. In fact he has no reputation at all. I Googled him and came up with about five hits. MARussellPESE 05:06, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Your determination of reputation is based on a clear sectarian motivated assumption as a Baha'i, not on any criteria of objectivity. The fact that in an article on the Bayanis you persist in calling them Azalis is a dead giveaway. Your googling skills also require fine honing. Look in amazon.com and barnesnoble.com. Self-published is also no criteria here. There are plenty of academic resources that are self-published or PoD. The issue is that Azal's book is deliberately left out of the references here but referred in "recent" developments. Clearly you are barking at the wind! Now was there anything else?

-- Curandero101 11 October 2006

Mr Jeff, it surprises that a person of your acuity fails to see what a review is. This,

''Earlier in 2004 Australian based Iranian esotericist Wahid Azal had launched a yahoogroups list called Bayan19 specifically dedicated to discussions of the religion of the Bayan. But Wahid Azal's Bayani gnostic universalism reflects a radical antinomian departure from the Bayani creed. It is more of a Sufi and crypto-Isma'ili gnostic reinterpretation of the Bayani faith (with Azal's own ruminations on the mystical philosophy of Ibn Arabi as the background) rather than the Bayani faith in any standard orthodox formulation.'

Has nothing to do with a review of Azal's book, but is describing Azal. This,

"His book Liber Decatriarchia Mystica (Library of the Most Great Name, Eastern Coast, Australia: 2006) does however dedicate an entire chapter to the early history of the Bayani faith from a standard Azali perspective.''"

Is not a review of it either. It is positing content. Was there anything else?

-- Curandero101 11 October 2006