Talk:The Four Valleys

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bahá'í Faith, a coordinated attempt to increase the quality and quantity of information about the Baháʼí Faith on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.Bahá'í FaithWikipedia:WikiProject Bahá'í FaithTemplate:WikiProject Bahá'í FaithBahá'í Faith articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Interpretation

I don't know who provided the interpretation to this Wikipedia entry but it is truly misguided. The entry as it read before I changed it described the four valleys as people who are seeking... huh?? The text of the Four Valleys says nothing about seekers, but rather, and I quote: "Those who progress in mystic wayfaring are of four kinds." Note Baha'u'llah uses a term which the learned scholars deigned to translate as "MYSTIC WAYFARING." Wayfaring and search, or seeking, are not synonymous. I don't know why someone supposed that a mystical wayfarer would be a seeker, other than perhaps they are not too familiar with the cultural milieu of Sufi mysticism to which Baha'u'llah referred.

For that reason, I changed the text of the interpretation section so that, at the very least, it wouldn't be a veil to common reason and commentary on traditional Sufi terms which are often convoluted by wayward, if sincere, Western Baha'is.

So finally, is this all just much ado about nothing? Yes and no. From one viewpoint it is irrelevant doctrine, but from another viewpoint, it is important. And now I quote this from Baha'u'llah, "These statements are made in the sphere of that which is relative, because of the limitations of men."

Salam, peace!

References?

There seems to be something funky going on with the references here -- I've noticed it on other pages, too (though not all). It seems that the references have been doubled, so that all citations are starting with the second set, making it look like there is no footnote #1, etc., and that the first footnote is instead #4. I don't think I'm being very articulate in trying to explain this, but if you take a look at the citations, you should see what I mean. How can we fix this? --Twilightsojourn 20:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's weird -- it seems to have fixed itself. Never mind (hopefully)! --Twilightsojourn 20:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wait -- it's back again. Argh. What's going on? --Twilightsojourn 21:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see it, it seems fine to me. Starts at number 1 and goes to number 3. -- Jeff3000 21:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do see a problem now, that the references are duplicated, but if you go to this page, which should ideally be the same, they are not. Hmmm.... -- Jeff3000 21:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Title

Why use this article not this Lemma: The Four Valleys? It's free! -- JCIV (talk) 22:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Wiki-uk (talk) 17:57, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]