Some Bahai's have also speculated that Baha'u'llah did this to protect Subh-i-Azal, which doesn't make any sense. If your intention was to protect someone, why would you put them out front and center, while you do your thing in the background?
Succesorship controversies abound in this religion, probably moreso than any other religion. Ironic, considering the almost manic insistence on "unity" this faith has. Even before this event, the Shaykhis had a similar problem. Not all of them believed in the Bab, or that a new religion was supposed to be established by the Qa'im. So after Siyyid Kazim died, the Shaykhi group split up into different "factions".
This happened every time a major figure in the faith died. When Baha'u'llah passed away, the fight was between 'Abdu'l-Baha and his elder brother, Mohammed Ali. Mohammed Ali was somewhat of a low-key figure (much like Subh-i-Azal), and didn't put a lot of emphasis on their own "greatness". An entire cult of personality was established around 'Abdu'l-Baha, however, much like his father before him.
When 'Abdu'l-Baha died, some people thought that his Will & Testament was a forgery, while others accepted the claim that Shoghi Effendi was appointed as his successor. When Shoghi Effendi died, he ostensibly left no Will & Testament, which doesn't make any sense. For someone as meticulous as he was portrayed to be, it makes no sense that he didn't write a Will before he died. This is the same person that would apparently agonize for hours over how to translate a single word of Baha'u'llah's writings, but he couldn't be bothered to write a Will?
Especially given how much the religion claims to value unity, it was irresponsible of him not to. Clearly appointing a successor or saying that there would be no successor at all, would have been better.
https://www.reddit.com/r/exbahai/comments/13pgdj7/give_us_the_dirt_whats_the_most_scandalous_thing/
0 comentários:
Post a Comment