Talk:Baháʼí Faith

"Haifan Baháʼí Faith" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Haifan Baháʼí Faith has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10 § Haifan Baháʼí Faith until a consensus is reached. Smkolins (talk) 21:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Women and religion

Wikipedia has a page on "Women and religion" which has no mention of the Baha'i Faith despite the strong positive position on the subject. The page "Baháʼí Faith and gender equality" seems to cover the issue. Could someone put a link/reference on the "Women and religion" page? Adm (talk) 14:41, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Bahá'u'lláh section needs editing

I believe that the section introducing Bahá'u'lláh needs to be changed because it does not provide an overview of Bahá'u'lláh himself. I have made a start at editing it (see below). I still need to get a few more sources and citations, but I think this fits better as an introduction to Baháʼu'lláh. You can see the full text with citations in my sandbox User:TwoEdits99/sandbox but I paste the text below as well. What do other editors think?

"Mírzá Husayn ʻAlí Núrí, who later took the title of Baháʼu'lláh (meaning "the Glory of God") was born in Tehran, Iran in 1817. Baháʼu'lláh is regarded as being the founder of the Bahá'í Faith. As a young adult, Baháʼu'lláh became a follower of the Báb after hearing about the Báb's message from Mullá Husayn Bushrú'í. As a follower of the Báb, Baháʼu'lláh, along with many other Bábí's (as followers of the Báb are called) faced persecution in Iran from the ruling and religious authorities, including a four month imprisonment in the Siyáh Chál (the "Black Pit") in 1852, a notorious underground dungeon in Tehran. This imprisonment came after a failed assassination attempt against the Shah, Naser al-Din Shah Qajar, by a few Bábís. Baháʼu'lláh was not involved in the assassination attempt. In the Siyáh Chál, Baháʼu'lláh had a spiritual experience which he designates as being the start of his religious mission.

Baháʼu'lláh was released from the Siyáh Chál after four months on the condition that he leaves Iran. In 1853, Baháʼu'lláh arrived in Baghdad, Iraq, where he spent the next ten years of his life before being banished further to Constantinople (now Istanbul) by the Ottoman Sultan. After a few months, Baháʼu'lláh was further exiled to Adrianople (now Edirne), where he remained for four years, until a royal decree of 1868 banished all Bábís to either Cyprus or ʻAkká, Israel. Baháʼu'lláh was sent to ʻAkká. Before his banishment to Constantinople, Baháʼu'lláh announced his claim of prophethood to his family and followers in a garden on the banks of the river Tigris in 1863. Bahá'ís regard this as being the founding moment of the Bahá'í Faith. This period of time is celebrated annually by Bahá'ís as the Festival of Ridván.

Baháʼu'lláh spent the remainder of his life in, and then near, the penal colony of ʻAkká. After an initially strict and harsh confinement in the citadel of ʻAkká, he was allowed to live in a home near ʻAkká, while still officially a prisoner of that city. He died there in 1892. Baháʼís regard his resting place at Bahjí as the Qiblih to which they turn in prayer each day. Baháʼu'lláh appointed his eldest son, 'Abbás Effendi, as his successor as head of the Bahá'í Faith.

Baháʼu'lláh produced almost 20,000 distinct works in his lifetime totalling over seven million words, in both Arabic and Persian, of which only 8% have been translated into English. Some of his writings include the Hidden Words, the Seven Valleys, the Kitáb-í-Íqán (the Book of Certitude), and the Kitáb-í-Áqdas. During the period while he was in Adrianople, Baháʼu'lláh also wrote letters to the world's religious and secular rulers, including Pope Pius IX, Napoleon III, and Queen Victoria. Most of Baháʼu'lláh's original works, or at least reliable transcriptions, have been preserved and are kept at the Bahá'í World Centre in Haifa, Israel." TwoEdits99 (talk) 19:14, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @TwoEdits99 for your proposal, I agree with it. I'd suggest expanding it a bit to cover some of the major themes in the writings of Baha'u'llah, e.g. the oneness of humanity and religions, progressive revelation, equality of sexes, non-violence, peace etc. Tarikhejtemai (talk) 18:58, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply @Tarikhejtemai, and that's a good idea regarding the themes. I will update my draft and try to include some of the themes. Do you have references for those? I can otherwise try to find some myself. TwoEdits99 (talk) 20:40, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

@TwoEdits99 I think the World of the Baha'i Faith, Introduction to the Baha'i Faith and this book are good references for those; thanks. Tarikhejtemai (talk) 12:44, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Bahá'u'lláh (Mírzá Ḥusayn-`Alí Núrí) in 1868.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:37, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

"Separated from Islam" is inaccurate.

"Separated from Islam" on the Infobox is inaccurate, the Bahá'í Faith is not considered to be a schism, sect or other from Islam. Same issue is seen in the Islam page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam where the Bahá'í Faith is listed as a separation of Islam. ~2026-16398-71 (talk) 15:35, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

I want to say the citation provided that states Bahá'í Faith is a schism also states "Most religious specialists now see it as an independent religion, with its religious background in Shiʻa Islam analogous to the Jewish context in which Christianity was established." ~2026-16398-71 (talk) 15:39, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Both claims are correct. It is now an independent religion, but when it started, it separated from Islam. Jeppiz (talk) 20:53, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Definitely not, both claims are not correct. The Bahá'í Faith supercedes the Bábi faith, which also did not separate from Islam. None claimed that it was a separation or schism of Islam. I refer to the quote above, scholarly consensus does not state that the Bahá'í Faith is a schism/separation of Islam. (time in point is not relevant) ~2026-16398-71 (talk) 21:34, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

The first sentence is meant to mean "both claims cannot be correct at the same time", there is a miscommunication in my above reply. ~2026-16398-71 (talk) 21:37, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

I think the problem was with the phrase being in the infobox, with no further context. I removed it from there. It probably deserves some kind of mention in the lead somewhere. Something like, "The Baha'i Faith had its origins in Shia Islam, but soon established itself as an independent religion, which is how it is now widely recognized." Cuñado ☼ - Talk 18:27, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

"had its origins in Shia Islam" I think is still not accurate. I think in a technical sense "separation of Islam" is not so incorrect when viewed in the same eye that the Christianity page has "separation of Judaism", this is if we use the thought process from the source which previously was cited in the "separation from Islam" in the infobox.

However I want to note that it is commonly used as an attack against the Bahá'í Faith to call it a separation/sect of Islam, even though it is an independent world religion as previosly established, also with your phrasing "had its origins in Shia Islam" and the cited text do not mean the same, the quote (as I understand it) refers to the cultural/religious context of the time, not the origin of the Faith itself.

Separation (basically "sect") would be inaccurate, so I appreciate the change as especially without the context of the full citation it is misleading. ~2026-21140-79 (talk) 15:47, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Photograph of Bahá'ú'lláh on this page.

The photograph of Bahá'ú'lláh on this page should be removed. As per multiple conversations, multiple votes in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bah%C3%A1%27%C3%AD_Faith/Picture and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bah%C3%A1%CA%BCu%27ll%C3%A1h/Photo#Removing_photograph_of_Bah%C3%A1%CA%BCu'll%C3%A1h. A consensus is clear, the photo not only does not belong on this page, keeping it on this page is unfair.

- The photo can very clearly be in a collapsed table, it is not.

- There SHOULD be a warning that this image is there, there is no.

- The photo can be behind a link, it currently is simply on the page.

It's on the page, without warning, not as a link, not as a collapsed table. The image should be removed or measures taken. ~2026-21140-79 (talk) 11:56, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

The image is added back in at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bah%C3%A1%CA%BC%C3%AD_Faith&oldid=1309034925. This change must be reverted. ~2026-21140-79 (talk) 11:57, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, ~2026-21140-79! Disputes on Wikipedia are solved through a consensus model based on our policies and guidelines, not votes. There is no policy-or-guideline-based reason to remove or hide the image, or add a warning, because Wikipedia is not censored. That being said, you're certainly welcome to create an account and update your settings to hide the image for yourself. You can find instructions to do that at HELP:NOIMAGE. Woodroar (talk) 15:48, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

It is not equal. A full depiction of Muhammad does not exist next to a chapter called "Muhammad" on the Islam wikipedia page, I saw one depiction of it in practically a footnote of an image. This is not the same for this page, where the image appears fairly early with practically no warning to practically every person who views this page.

I did not ask for this image to be censored. I merely suggested that there be a warning to precede it, the image behind a link, or the image under a collapsed table. The image being where it is now, does not add the value you believe it does. From what I can tell from previous discussions such as (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bah%C3%A1%27%C3%AD_Faith/Picture) is that the consensus was that the image did not belong in this page.

I disagree that the image should be on full display here, but I do not ask for it to be censored completely. ~2026-21140-79 (talk) 18:06, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

You are correct, but you need to make an account and seek a consensus with the RFC process. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 22:37, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

@Cuñado, there is no requirement that this user makes an account (unless they want to hide the image for themself), and an RFC is likely not appropriate here (WP:RFCBEFORE). Regardless, it is unlikely to succeed.

@~2026-21140-79, while you may feel your suggestions are different than censorship, many editors would disagree.

Also, please note that:

• A discussion from 2005 is unlikely to be meaningful here; policies and guidelines have changed over 20 years, and consensus has been established since then.
• On giving a warning: Disclaimers should not be used in articles that contain potentially or patently offensive material. (WP:OM)
• On collapsing or otherwise obscuring the content: Auto-collapsed (pre-collapsed) elements should not be used to hide content in the article's main body. (MOS:PRECOLLAPSE)

Please heed the advice of Woodroar and visit HELP:NOIMAGE if you would like to hide images for yourself. Wracking ^talk! 23:51, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome to your opinion on the matter, but dozens of people have already expressed what this individual is saying over many years. It is reasonable to have it on the biography page, but there is no requirement to having it on this page, and it carries a cost to people who are trying to avoid it. The situation is inaccurately described as censorship, which is totally wrong. People avoiding it don't care at all if others see it, and the argument presented above about logging in and hiding it for the individual is totally missing the target. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 19:27, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

What happened to the FA status? LoL Swissro (talk) 00:10, 25 May 2026 (UTC)