Marcello wrote:
Depends what you mean by “teaching”. If you mean that the hierarchy dictates the dogma and the laypeople accept without questioning, then you have a point. But in all the great religions, “teaching” involves discussion, debate and argument. The great religions have lasted for thousands of years precisely because there was no central authority controlling the dialogue (although the Vatican certainly gave it a good try!). In contrast, the hierarchy of the Baha’i Faith seeks to create “unity” by stifling diversity. In the Ruhi books, they’ve even gone so far as to forbid individual interpretation. Until the Baha’i Faith can break free of this inflexible dogma, it’s unlikely to find a place alongside the great religions.
Your points are either invalid or downright factually incorrect.
Although agree with you, I don’t believe everything in Ruhi but neither does everybody. Therefor by your definition Ruhi is a good tool because it causes discussion, debate, and argument. At least the circles that i’ve been in.
Please don’t make me go into detail. Every Baha’i knows that they can interpret anything to mean anything and everything crazy that their mind thinks of EXCEPT if it contradicts what the Head of the Faith has written. I have been in many, many, MANY, Baha’i communities including a year at The Baha’i World Centre and have not witnessed what you would refer to as “stifling diversity”. Lorenzo