---

From nineteen@onramp.netThu Mar 21 10:34:21 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 12:23:10 -0600 (CST)
From: "Richard C. Logan"
To: Alma Engels
Cc: Talisman
Subject: Re: Covenantal Issues was Re[2]: Talisman as Comedy
>Richard, I have been thinking about bringing up the question of Covenantal
>appropriateness of any post sent to email lists in general and to Talisman
>in particular for a number of reasons. I realize that the recent letter
>from the Universal House of Justice to David House indicates that this is
>appropriate. So let me raise some questions here which others may care to
>discuss. And let me refresh your minds with what I think is the relevant
>portion of the House's reply to David:
>
>> Thus, if any participant in an email discussion feels that a view put
>>forward appears to contradict or undermine the provisions of the Covenant, he
>>should be free to say so, explaining candidly and courteously why he feels
>>as he does. The person who made the initial statement will then be able to
>>re-evaluate his opinion and, if he still believes it to be valid, he should
be
>>able to explain why it is not contrary to either the letter or the spirit of
>>the Covenant.
Dearest Alma,
I understand your concerns and they are most legitimate. Although one
cannot say that the friends must not "courteously" and indeed "candidly"
discuss their concerns regarding viewpoints that "contradict or undermine
the provisions of the Covenant". It is a lot to take upon one's self to
bring such a thing up in that light, and particularly in public. In
private one might make reasonable inquiries that are couched in the most
courteous and respectful language, however, public accusations would
probably be unwise and unproductive.
It is hard for me to see how "Covenantal appropriateness" or as I think
you are expressing it--a certain mind set that would be considered
*right* while others would be considered wrong or "non-covenental" just
doesn't seem IMHO within the spirit of Baha'u'llah's teachings. All
sinfulness so to speak would have to be considered as "non-covenental"
so it would be judgmental to *generally* express such sentiments of
unconvenentalness towards our fellow Baha'is, although, there will be
times when Baha'is start to break the Covenant in the sense of those who
merit excommunication. I would hate to think that I imputed unjustly
such a thing to a fellow believer.
Richard
Richard C. Logan nineteen@onramp.net
Maintain HomePage "The Baha'is of Lubbock"
http://rampages.onramp.net/~nineteen/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
How manifold are the truths which must remain unuttered until the
appointed time is come! Even as it has been said:
"Not everything that a man knoweth can be disclosed, nor can
everything that he can disclose be regarded as timely, nor can every
timely utterance be considered as suited to the capacity of those who
hear it." --Gleanings from the writings of Baha'u'llah
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From belove@sover.netThu Mar 21 10:35:28 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 08:07:42 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Re[2]: Talisman as Comedy
I also see lots of insecurities in Talisman comments and arguments. Although I see and hear insecurities all over the place. Part of the spiritual path. Part of being a sensitive guy.
I don't think we can wait until we're saints to conduct dialogue.
Probably the biggest danger of the dark parts of our dialogue is that lurkers and participants even more naive than the speakers, might mistake air-time for imprimateur and might also mistake articulateness for spirituality and nobility.
As far as the question of labels goes -- "scholars," vs. "academics," "intellectuals," etc., -- I've always been partial to the designation "professional scholars." I think scholars are like artists, actors, and musicians in that some are fortunate enough, gifted enough, and dedicated enough to get paid to do it. There are professionals, avid amateurs and dabblers in every field, including scholarship.
In general, the pro's do it better, have better training, wider knowledge, higher standards and so on. But often the work of the non-pro's is pretty good and worth attending to. A lot of it depends on the discernment of the buyer. In some fields, I can tell how good someone is, regardless of their credentials. In other areas, I tend to rely on credentials.
I also thing there is a lot of reverse snobbery in the public and there are sections of people who perversely refuse to recognize credentials and training, taking a strange pride in their own discernment.
I notice that in the areas in which I am most filled with love and enthusiasm and have been at it the longest time..-- areas of my mature taste --. take music for instance, I'm pretty broadminded and generous in my tastes. I think I'm also that way in the realm of intellectual issues.
And then there is that area that Paul Simon, in his song, "Maybe I think too much," called, "God Talk." Talisman is an example. I think I'm mature tastes there as well.
Philip
From M@upanet.uleth.caThu Mar 21 10:35:59 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 12:12:58 -0700
From: M
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: maqsud
Dear Sen. Thanks for responding
re: 'specific matters'
> Such exhortations to union and concord as are inscribed
> in the Books of the Prophets by the Pen of the Most High
> bear reference unto specific matters; not a union that would
> lead to disunity or a concord which would create discord.
> This is the station where measures are set unto everything, a
> station where every deserving soul shall be given his due.
> Well is it with them that appreciate the meaning and grasp
> the intent of these words, and woe betide the heedless.
You wrote . . .
"I don't see anything here that would warrant a reading in terms of
successively *higher* levels of unity".
My reading, as well as my thinking, is generally rather centrifugal and
scattered. I thought the term "specific matters" implied the same thing as
"collective center" which of course could be anything, or any "specific
matter" that is conducive to unity and concord at any level. The rite of
circumcision, holy communion, the love of coffee or a fear of aliens, are
all "specific matters" which are, to some degree or another, conducive to
unity and concord within a group, but which can ultimately lead to disunity
and discord if they are imposed universally.
" On the contrary, the implication is that the exhortations to
unity of the past, which referred to specific matters, have been
indiscriminately applied, either in areas in which union is not
appropriate," or to an extent which exceeds the original intention,
with the result that measures have been exceeded and deserving
souls not given their due."
What's "contrary"? We're in complete agreement. The indiscriminant
application of, and insistence upon the infallibility and irrevocability of
those exhortations to unity and concord, uttered by the prophets of the
past, which refered to specific, limited matters, have now become the cause
of disunity and discord; disunity among diverse unities. The Revelation of
Baha'u'llah provides a transcendent collective center. It embraces all
"specific matters" and unifies a diversity of unities.
I'm inclined to dissagree with your wording that "union is not
appropriate" in certain areas. I don't believe that such union can "exceed
the original intention" without becoming disunion". My understanding is
that initial means of attaining union becomes inappropriate.
"Union and concord are good in specific matters and within certain
measures, is the implication."
I would phrase it "Union and concord" are essential in all matters but only
attainable to a certain measure within "specific matters".
"I *think* this is talking about attempts to create a monolithic
society in imitation of the one God - to turn the 'many' back
into the One - which means that differentiations which are
intended and which reflect differences between the names of
God are obscured and deserving souls, who represent distinct
names (Kingship, eg, or ulama/ilm) are not given their due."
I agree. And is not this what the teachings on unity in diversity are
intended to safeguard against. Against "social levelling". I think that
this is one of the greatest challenges facing our Baha'i communities.
I have met some Baha'is, for example, who have insisted that
Baha'u'llah claimed diversity of language will not exist in the future.
That there'll be a "universal language" not just an "auxillary universal
language". Language of course is a "specific matter" a "collective center",
one of the primary means of "unity and concord", the backbone of any cuture.
To suggest that an auxillary universal language will render all other
languages obsolete is a perfect example of taking an exhortation intended
to promote union and concord and relating to a specific matter and making it
a cause of disunity and discord.
Forgive me for going on and on but I find the following passage
rather interesting, and related to this discussion. It's from "Disturbing
The Universe" by Freeman Dyson, Chapter 20 (Clades and Clones)
" It is true that a world with a universal common language would be
simpler for bureaucrats an administrators to manage. But there is strong
evidence , in our own history and in pre-history as well as in the history
of contemporary primitive societies, to support the hypothesis that
plasticity and diversity of languages played an essential role in human
evolution. It is not just an inconvenient historical accident that we have
a variety of languages. It was nature's way to make it possible for us to
evolve repidly. Rapid evolution of human capacities demanded that social
and biological progress go hand in hand. Biological progress came from
random genetic fluctuations that could be significant only in small and
genetically isolated communities. To keep a small community genetically
isolated and to enable it to evolve new social institutions, it was vitally
important that the members of the community could be quickly separated from
their neighbors by barriers of language. So our emergence as an intelligent
species may have depended crucially on the fact that we have this
astonishing ability to switch from proto-Indo-European to Hittite to Hebrew
to Latin to English and back to Hebrew within a few generations. It is
likely that in the future our survival and out further development will
depend in an equally crucial way on the maintenance of cultural and
biological diversity. In the future as in the past, we shall be healthier if
we speak many languages and are quick to invent new ones as opportunities
for cultural differentiation arise. . . .
"Diversity on the social level means preserving a multiplicity of languages
and cultures and allowing room for the growth of new ones, in the face of
the homogenizing influences of modern communications and mass media."
"When life invades a new habitat she never moves with a single species. She
comes with a variety of species, and as soon as she is establisned, her
species spread and diversity still further" Freeman Dyson "Disturbing the
Universe"
To me, all this means that true "unity and concord" cannot be
established unless and untill we not only acknowledged the need for, but
regard as essential to our very survival, the preservation and protection of
diversity in all it's manifestations.
With Regard to your other posting . . .
"Of possible relevance to the various kinds of learned in the lawh-i-Maqsud:
from the commentary on the surah of the sun
O questioner, know thou that the people pride themselves upon
knowledge, and praise it, whereas this Servant complaineth of it. For
without it Baha would not have been imprisoned in Akka with extreme
abasement, nor would He have drunk from the cup of woes proffered
by His enemies. Eloquence hath banished Me, and the science of
rhetoric brought Me low.
Thank you - I love this. Could you please, or could someone, E-mail me the
full text.
Appreciatively
Gord.
From nightbrd@humboldt1.comThu Mar 21 10:36:25 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 11:09:43 -0800
From: Doug Myers
To: Talisman@indiana.edu, Sadra
Subject: Re: Insecure Scholars?
Dear Nima,
You wrote:
> They have yet to produce one shred of
>evidence from primary texts that what these "scholars" are saying is
>foundationally wrong or "Covenantly suspect."
>
>Regards,
>Nima
>
>**************************************************************
>* Paradox is a characteristic of truth. What communis opinio *
>* has of truth is surely no more than an elementary deposit *
>* of generalizing partial understanding, related to truth *
>* even as sulphurous fumes are to lightning. *
>* *
>* --From the correspondence of Count Paul von Wartenburg *
>* and Wilhelm Dilthey *
>**************************************************************
My question is this dear friend[if I may call you that as I feel I know a
little about you from your postings on Talisman], what is your definition of
primary texts in this case?
Because of Baha'u'llah's Kitab-i-Ahd & Kitab-i-Aqdas and 'Abdu'l-Baha's Will
and Testament I included the Guardian and the House of Justice in the term
primary texts.
I would appreciate hearing your views.
Doug Myers
nightbrd@humboldt1.com
"Nothing survives but the way we live our lives." JB
Doug Myers
nightbrd@humboldt1.com
"Nothing survives but the way we live our lives." JB
From lua@sover.netThu Mar 21 10:37:25 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 14:20:34 -0500
From: LuAnne Hightower
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Which camp should I be trying to get into? I thought there was only one.
On 3/18/96 Mark Foster wrote:
>One of my concerns about certain postings on Talisman is that they seem to
>identify "intellectuals" with those sharing a particular mind set or world
>view. It has often appeared to me as though there is a litmus test on this
>list for being an intellectual. One must first accept a particular set of
>_critical_ assumptions. If one does not, one falls (or, sometimes, is
>condemned) into the other camp, i.e., the anti-intellectuals. This sort of
>divisiveness, which is repeated over and over again, sometimes using
>different labels, appears to me to be entirely inconsistent with the
>principle of unity in diversity.
I find this point of view to be absurd. Is this statement itself not
entirely inconsistent with the principle of unity in diversity?
I have never experienced this 'litmus test' mentality from anyone on
Talisman, have found nothing but encouragement when I have ventured to state
my disagreement with a particular attitude or point of view, have received
personal posts from those who even disagree with my particular approach that
are more than cordial and almost always instructive about certain
weaknesses in my reasoning. Although my undergraduate work (I don't EVEN
have an MA or a PhD, but Mom and Pop love me anyway) centered on the history
of ideas, I do not consider myself a "scholar" or label myself an
"intellectual." More often than not my particular struggle has been focused
on approaching these matters of the Faith (even the historical stuff)
equally from the heart and the mind. As a result, my postings are largely
more emotional in tone than most. Yet despite my initial trepidation about
speaking from that deepest part of myself for fear of being labelled "I
don't even know what" by the professional scholars on the list, I have taken
the plunge on several occasions and have NEVER received any attacks on or
criticism about what I have posted from these individuals. I have received
nothing but kindness, encouragement, and open handedness from these
"scholars" you insist on slandering. If they so avidly adhere to this
'particular mind set or wold view,' then how comes it that they are so
capable of disagreeing and arguing with each other, as well as, at times
even correcting each other/accepting correction from each other about
certain claims advanced or statements made about various writings or the
translations/personal interpretations thereof? It is my observation that if
I come into a discussion with a particular attitude or agenda, then anything
that is said can be interpreted to reinforce that attitude or agenda. On
the other hand, if I come with an open mind, free of expectation and
judgment, then I am free to take what is said and sift through it, meditate
on it, keep what is useful, and discard the rest (perhaps after double
checking to make sure it is, in fact, not useful). I wonder what it is
(really) that evokes such outrage. I find "them" rather nice folk. I feel
welcomed and accepted and enriched by this very diverse cyber-clan, and very
puzzled by the divisive statements bandied about by those who hold these
anti-something (I'm not even sure what) points of view. It brings me sadness.
Grateful to be with you all,
LuAnne
From burlb@bmi.netThu Mar 21 10:38:18 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 13:30 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: DEREK COCKSHUT
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Fwd: RE: Insecure Scholars?
>I believe you are both refering to our dear friend Juan Cole.I do not
>think for one moment anybody on this particular thread was considoring
>him.
Of course not. They were all talking about *me* because I was out of the
room. They *always* do that! You think I don't know what goes on around
here when I turn my back to actually *do* something with my life? I have
started dreaming in E-Mail, and some of the messages have been shocking!
So, go ahead and pick on me all you want, and I don't care *how* you pick on
me, I only demand (respectfully) for you to tell me *why* you pick on me,
*why* you doubt the authenticiy of my title "Dr." *why* you think I am
paranoid, defensive, and imagaine eveyone is either plotting against me or
ignoring me. Well, I happen to have a list of names here in my briefcase of
people who I heard from someone who knows these things once voted for
themselves in LSA elections when they knew they were not the most qualified
to serve. You all better be nice to me from now on or I will cause so much
trouble for myself that you will never hear the end of it!
When Dr. Jack McCants of the NSA gets here on April 12th you better believe
that we are gonna have a big long talk about what's *really* going on in the
American Baha'i Community.
Dr. Burl
PS: You are all honestly invited to come to Walla Walla for our big event on
April 13th featuring Dr.McCants, catered dinner, entertainment, and much
frivolity. Pay your own way, no hospitality provided. For more info, just ask.
*************************************
MAN OVERBOARD by Burl Barer is still only $19.95 and may be ordered from any
bookstore. ISBN#: 1-56901-815-4 Buy Yours Today!
********************
From mfoster@qni.comThu Mar 21 10:38:42 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 16:12:41 -0600
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: LuAnne Hightower , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Which camp should I be trying to get into? I thought there was only one.
At 02:20 PM 3/20/96 -0500, LuAnne Hightower wrote:
>I find this point of view to be absurd. Is this statement itself not
>entirely inconsistent with the principle of unity in diversity?
>
>I have never experienced this 'litmus test' mentality from anyone on
>Talisman, have found nothing but encouragement when I have ventured to state
>my disagreement with a particular attitude or point of view, have received
>personal posts from those who even disagree with my particular approach that
>are more than cordial and almost always instructive about certain
>weaknesses in my reasoning.
LuAnne -
Thanks for your note. While I agree that some people have not been subjected
to harsh verbal assault from other Talismanians, that has not been the case
with everyone. I have myself been referred to as a fundamentalist, a
premodernist, a fascist, and other labels on Talisman, and I have seen the
same, or worse, happen to others.
To the Light, Mark (Foster)
From sadra@rt66.comThu Mar 21 10:40:12 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 15:27:52 -0700 (MST)
From: Sadra
To: Doug Myers
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: primary sources
>
> My question is this dear friend[if I may call you that as I feel I know a
> little about you from your postings on Talisman], what is your definition of
> primary texts in this case?
>
> Because of Baha'u'llah's Kitab-i-Ahd & Kitab-i-Aqdas and 'Abdu'l-Baha's Will
> and Testament I included the Guardian and the House of Justice in the term
> primary texts.
>
Dear Doug--
Since the Bab, Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha are the Three Central Figures
of the Baha'i Faith respectively, therefore Their Writings (and
especially those of Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha) constitute the primary
texts of this Faith. While Shoghi Effendi was the head of the Faith, and is
the Guardian, and the House its current head, nevertheless since neither
one was/is recipient of Divine Inspiration (in the sense of
'wahy' or 'revelation') nor the Centre of the Covenant, which is the sole
function of the Master, or in any way, shape or manner of equal rank to the
Manifestation & His immediate Successor, hence their corpus cannot be, IMO,
considered primary in the way that that of the Central Figures is but should
be, rather, looked upon as secondary albeit complimentary. Sen, Juan,
Ahang or John can correct me if I'm wrong, though.
Happy-Naw Ruz to one and all!
regards, Nima
**************************************************************
* Paradox is a characteristic of truth. What communis opinio *
* has of truth is surely no more than an elementary deposit *
* of generalizing partial understanding, related to truth *
* even as sulphurous fumes are to lightning. *
* *
* --From the correspondence of Count Paul von Wartenburg *
* and Wilhelm Dilthey *
**************************************************************
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comThu Mar 21 10:41:31 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 15:26:54 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Fwd: Re: Fwd: RE: Insecure Scholars?
k
>I believe you are both refering to our dear friend Juan Cole.I do not
>think for one moment anybody on this particular thread was considoring
>him.
Of course not. They were all talking about *me* because I was out of
the
room. They *always* do that! You think I don't know what goes on
around
here when I turn my back to actually *do* something with my life? I
have
started dreaming in E-Mail, and some of the messages have been
shocking!
So, go ahead and pick on me all you want, and I don't care *how* you
pick on
me, I only demand (respectfully) for you to tell me *why* you pick on
me,
*why* you doubt the authenticiy of my title "Dr." *why* you think I am
paranoid, defensive, and imagaine eveyone is either plotting against me
or
ignoring me. Well, I happen to have a list of names here in my
briefcase of
people who I heard from someone who knows these things once voted for
themselves in LSA elections when they knew they were not the most
qualified
to serve. You all better be nice to me from now on or I will cause so
much
trouble for myself that you will never hear the end of it!
My dear Dr.Burl
I am so glad you have come out of the closet and exposed all these
people who are always talking about you behind your back.I think the
worst is when they use as yet unrevealed and only translated into
Islandaco tablets to mock us all.But where I ask you is the respect.You
and I have only ask for a little money to go to Patagonia.As the
Satirists of the Baha'i Community especially Talisman, have we received
respect never.They laugh with our work but always refuse to pay.The
countless number of cancelled articles and speeches, the shunning do we
complain no we percy on.Percy keeps on with Dean and you and I are
never seen.
We should form our own list separate from our top secret one that
nobody can join to one even more secret that even we can not join.This
will stop the spying, those long nights of interrogation we keep having
to undergo, all because the Lady loved Milk Tray.
Thank -you for your bravery in coming forward enjoy searching under the
beds I am sure thats where they are hiding.
Yours in perfect sanity with the ironing board inbeded in his head>
DR.Uncle Derek
When Dr. Jack McCants of the NSA gets here on April 12th you better
believe
that we are gonna have a big long talk about what's *really* going on
in the
American Baha'i Community.
Dr. Burl
PS: You are all honestly invited to come to Walla Walla for our big
event on
April 13th featuring Dr.McCants, catered dinner, entertainment, and
much
frivolity. Pay your own way, no hospitality provided. For more info,
just ask.
*********
From lwalbrid@indiana.eduThu Mar 21 10:41:48 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 18:34:45 -0500 (EST)
From: lwalbrid
To: talisman@majordomo.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: a bunch of thanks
I would like to thank Derek for explaining to me that I should spread the
marmalade on toast and not on JOhn's toes. I admit I'm relieved. What a
mess! Also, thanks Derek for explaining that I am not expected to write
permission letters for Mark, though I don't understand why not. I have a
great deal of experience with such having raised a couple of boys who
always need special permission for one thing or another.
I want to thank Burl for warning me that he reads his postings even when
he is out of the room. He spared me the embarassment of posting
something truly outrageous about him. Whew!
And, I want to thank David for posting all those letters and e-mail
exchanges. As Alma suggested, now we have the REST of the story. Linda
From 73043.1540@compuserve.comThu Mar 21 10:42:06 1996
Date: 20 Mar 96 18:32:38 EST
From: John Dale <73043.1540@compuserve.com>
To: TALISMAN-LIST
Cc: Baha'i-Sci-of-Real-List ,
Baha'i-st-List ,
Peter Conn ,
Cheshmak A Farhoumand ,
Ronald GLOSSOP , Vonda McCrae ,
Cynthia McDaniel , "I. Olson"
Subject: The Gender of the UHJ - Simply a Symbol of Baha'u'llah?
Dear Friends,
I am a new reader on Talisman. The Israeli newspaper article just posted
in Talisman in which reference is made to the inconsistency of supporting gender
equality and not having women on the Universal House of Justice is obviously
going to come up many times, and it brings to mind my own thoughts on this
issue. I know that a lot of discussion has flowed over this issue in the past,
so my questions are: (1) is there an archive of this discussion? (2) if not,
can someone summarize the best thinking we currently have on this topic?
In my own mind, the male gender of the Universal House of Justice is
simply a symbol of Baha'u'llah Himself, Who happened to be male, and has nothing
to do with any inherent capacities of one gender versus another. Similarly the
number of people on the House of Justice is 9, which is, again, as the number of
Baha, a symbol for Baha'u'llah. The actual number of people on the body, as
Abdu'l-Baha says somewhere, could be more than this -- it doesn't really matter.
If this is the general consensus about this issue, I wonder why the
person at the World Center who was interviewed by the journalist simply didn't
say so, instead of talking about it in terms of "divine wisdom" and
"exceptions".
Sincere best wishes to all!
John Dale
From 73043.1540@compuserve.comThu Mar 21 10:42:21 1996
Date: 20 Mar 96 18:31:53 EST
From: John Dale <73043.1540@compuserve.com>
To: "Don R. Calkins"
Cc: Baha'i-Sci-of-Real-List ,
Baha'i-st-List ,
MYSTIC-L ,
TALISMAN-LIST
Subject: Re: JUSTICE
Dear Don,
If it is true that Justice is an attribute of God, then it is interesting
to think how it might be a _functional_ attribute.
Function occurs when there is more than just oneness. Perhaps justice
therefore relates to the primal process of manifestation.
This gets me back to the Christian notion (not just Christian, of course)
of the tri-unity of the Godhead. Did Christianity ever link this mystical
tri-unity with the concept of justice, of cosmic balancing and adjustment
between positive and negative through the reconciling?
In the work of John Godolphin Bennett (see his four volumes of "The
Dramatic Universe"), this tri-unity aspect of Will as manifestation is developed
along systematic lines in a very interesting mathematical way which shows how
this triadic process of manifestation generates increasingly interlinked
"worlds" of will which correspond to the traditional notion of the Chain of
Being or levels of emanation. His student Tony Blake has carried this even
further in recent publications to include more detailed reference to the Hindu
concept of the threefold process of the gunas.
If you (or anyone) are interested in looking at this in depth, please let
me know.
Sincerely,
John Dale
From 73043.1540@compuserve.comThu Mar 21 10:42:48 1996
Date: 20 Mar 96 18:32:44 EST
From: John Dale <73043.1540@compuserve.com>
To: "Mark A. Foster"
Cc: Baha'i-Sci-of-Real-List ,
Baha'i-st-List ,
"I. Olson" , TALISMAN-LIST ,
Yael Wurmfeld
Subject: "Old World Order"
Dear Mark,
You wrote today in another posting: "However, we are all in the same
boat. We are living in this moral world, with all its limitations of perception,
trying to reflect the "divinity of God" in our human realities. To me, though,
the key to happiness and freedom from pain is to turn away from worldly
ideologies - and not to try and emulate them or to take one side or the other in
the great culture war which has been sweeping the planet. We can certainly adopt
what is useful, and what we use will differ depending on our understandings of
their [you mean "our"?]Teachings and how they should be applied. But we can
leave the rest. We have the new paradigm for a global society and don't need to
rely on the viewpoints of the old order."
I agree that we Baha'is have been given _some_ of the new paradigms for a
global society. Examples are the explicit notion of progressive revelation; the
emphasis on gender and race equality; the process of consultation; and a
_beginning_ design of some institutions through which humanity may begin to
achieve what could be called global self-government guided by God, or what
previous traditions have called the Kingdom of God on Earth, in which global, or
even "cosmic" values are dominant.
But I'm sure you will agree that we should be very much on guard against
an attitude that says that we Baha'is have been given _all_ the paradigms and
that all truth somehow resides only within the Baha'i community or within a
revealed text and nowhere else. Furthermore, we cannot simply "leave the rest"
-- I often wish we could! -- because the "rest" is precisely what still has to
undergo a living transformation into more and more radiant ("baha'i")
self-consciousness and self-expression.
The whole notion, in my mind, of a science of reality, taken from the
side of human epistemology, is one of a progressive refinement of hypotheses,
eliminating the ones we can definitely disprove and cooperating with one another
to try to gain facts and to perform experiments that will, as rapidly as
possible, enlarge the Realm of the Disproved and take us forward to the Realm of
the Not-Yet-Disproved. In other words, truth, for us, is the
"not-yet-disproved." It is always provisional and relative to what we have
actually _done_ to act on it and test it out.
It is precisely because human beings have begun to take scientific
methods earnestly in some areas that we have seen several paradigms or
development which have come to light ("been revealed") through science in the
last 150 years which are not even spoken of in the Baha'i Writings or at best
very briefly as far as I know. (Of course with so much still untranslated, one
cannot say for sure.) The enormous role of chance and "chaos" in the world is an
example. Chance seems now to stretch all the way from the quantum equation of
the tiniest part to the quantum state of the whole Creation. A lot off work is
still needed, I think, to integrate this "chance" dimension of reality into a
natural theology. Another example is the power that genetic engineering and
nanotechnolgy will bestow upon people to literally redesign their own bodies,
possibly their own minds and emotions -- literally who and what they are and how
long they will live. A third is the genuine possibility of contact with
extra-terrestrial intelligence.
These are far from insignificant developments. In fact, they are
developments of absolutely staggering importance, and yet it is clear that we
cannot find much explicit material about them in the Writings as so far
translated, and that we therefore cannot make fully intelligent judgments about
them based on the "glimmer" of Truth that Baha'u'llah says that God has revealed
through Him to humanity. That "glimmer" was always meant to be expanded into a
steady gleam, a shining light, and then a Sun (the "Daystar of Truth") through
the cooperative efforts of billions of intelligent beings, who otherwise would
be deprived of a meaningful intellectual role in Creation.
I see Baha'u'llah's revelation as a genetic code for S/self-evolution, a
spiritual DNA molecule that will lead us unto "all truth" just like a seed leads
to a great tree. Wherever we happen to be, in terms of our knowledge and
understanding, is simply a soil for that seed to be constantly planted in.
In this light I really honestly don't know what you mean, exactly, by the
term "worldly ideologies," since the Baha'i "ideology" is (or should be) just as
world-embracing in its own spiritually comprehensive way as Marxism tried to be
on its own terms or as any genuine scientific approach to Creation should be. Is
environmentalism, for example, a "worldly" ideology? Is feminism a "worldly"
ideology? Is economics a "worldly" ideology? The essence of the error that we
attempt to point to through this word seems to be notion of an "exclusive" focus
on finite realities while ignoring the totality in which those realities are
set. Although we can subsume the experience we have on this planetary surface of
the Earth into fuller experiences available in larger, more detached settings, I
worry when we set about simply leaving them behind or denigrating them in some
way that does not really seem to be called for.
The so-called Old World Order -- whatever this may actually refer to --
must have a certain level of positivity, a certain "place" in the spectrum of
possible worlds, or it would not exist at all, and instead of simply making
rejective comparisons, we may ask of any aspect of the OWO, "Have the people
involved in this aspect yet seen that aspect in light of principles X, Y, and Z
or facts a, b, and c?" If not, let us Baha'is devise ways to dialogue with them
and help them look at it in those lights and to help them, if they wish, to move
towards a closer approximation of something which their own intelligence tells
them is more desirable.
Again, in Karl Popper's viewpoint, which I have adopted until I find a
better one, one humbly accepts all propositions from whatever source, and one
asks whether particular propositions have been definitely shown to be false. If
they have been, we can know where the truth does _not_ reside. In this way we
avoid the pitfall of dogmatism about where it does reside and over "revealed"
versus other kinds of truths, and we don't have to feel any need to go around
saying in effect "we have the' paradigm (and you non-Baha'is don't)".
This dyad-dominated viewpoint on ownership of truth is not simply
repugnant to the public we seek to reach but also represents extremely poor and
unsynergistic methodology because it precisely in inviting and turning the
energies of the world into justly and scientifically disproving Baha'i
propositions that the light of the non-disprovability residing (if it does) in
those propositions will begin to break through the clouds and penetrate down to
the earth of global public acceptance.
And in the process we all will learn new things.
Best wishes as always!
John Dale
From PXQ00435@niftyserve.or.jpThu Mar 21 10:43:46 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 11:36:00 +0900
From: "K. BABB"
To: TALISMAN@indiana.edu
Subject: A Little Appreciation
Dear Sonja,
I read your message to Talisman with interest. It is so true, all
of it. The thing that is particularly distressing, as you have
mentioned in other places, is how can people value a publication
if they aren't willing to "invest" in it (i.e. subscribe)? It is
surprising how many people believe that since ARTS DIALOGUE is a
grassroots periodical where everything from articles to production
is non-profit (i.e. no one is paid for their labor), that it should
be free! This kind of logic escapes me. Just the fact that paper
and ink, photocopying services, and postage costs money---not to
mention the time spent typing, editing, working on layout, and doing
the copying and mailing---makes me wonder where these folks imagine
BAFA gets the capital to pay for these. Of course they might feel
that ARTS DIALOGUE isn't worth the cost of the subscription. In that
case, they can subscribe for only a year. That's only fair. But if
they could only realize that, as you rightly stated, ARTS DIALOGUE is
a global publication, they are helping to make this goal possible since
their subscription subsidizes those readers in poorer countries.
Isn't this what Baha'is do every time they contribute to the Funds,
really? Surely, part of what we give to our national fund goes in
some measure to the Universal House of Justice, Continental Fund, the
Arc Fund, or for the up-keep of some House of Worship.
You are right, the bottom line is that most people don't
value art, (no more than they value scholarship!). Life is largely
going to work, coming home and finding some mindless diversion till
they have to go to work again. I think that's because they don't
understand to what degree on a daily basis they interact with creativity
("art"). The general population seems to think that art is only what
you go to museums to see. It is amusing to me to think that even the
diversion they seek all have their elements of creativity! If only
people in general would stop and imagine a world devoid of the beauty
or the thought-provoking significance creativity offers, I should
think they'd appreciation the work artists of all fields do. And that
is all we struggling creators want (well, most of us anyway)---a little
appreciation. And BAFA offers that through ARTS DIALOGUE. Let's not
let THAT die.
With love, Kathleen
From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpThu Mar 21 10:45:07 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 96 14:01:56 JST
From: "Stephen R. Friberg"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Mysticism Conference Report from Sandra Fotos
Dear Friends:
Sandy Fotos has asked me to forward the following report, which she has
prepared for ABS North America, to Talisman. She would very much appreciate
comments on accuracy and suggestions for improvements. Please contact
her at:
104220.2146@compuserve.com
Yours sincerely, Stephen R. Friberg
........................................................................
Dear friends,
Here's a report of the Bosch Mysticism conference. I'll be sending it to
the ABSs of North American and Japan, so if any of the presenters wish to
comment on/correct my interpretation of their talks or activities (it's
common to forward presentation reviews for comments before the reviews are
sent off for publication), please email me directly at
<104220.2146@compuserve.com>.
Yours, SF
........................................................................
Mysticism Conference at Bosch Baha'i School: Raising the Call for a Rich
Devotional Life
>From February 23 through 24th, a remarkable conference took place at Bosch
Baha'i School, Santa Cruz, California. Envisioned as the first in an annual
series of conferences focusing on the mystical teachings of the Bab,
Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l Baha, the Baha'i Mysticism Conference enabled the
97 participants to develop a greater sense of devotion and mysticism in
their personal lives, and to explore ways to enrich the devotional aspects
of Baha'i community life in general.
Although mysticism has always been part of the religious experience, until
Islam it existed at only the individual level. With the rise of the Sufis
(Islamic mystics) mysticism became a major flow of thought pursuing the
knowledge of transcendent truth through meditation and prayer. By chanting
verses from the Writings, the presence of God is invoked. Musical
repetition of sacred verses sets up a rhythm which naturally units people,
uplifting them so that they are more receptive. Borrowing from this Sufi
tradition, one of the highlights of the Mysticism Conference was its use of
zikr (chanting sacred verses) in the devotional portions of the program.
The program itself was an eclectic combination of scholarly presentations
and uplifting experiential activities such as group zikr, song, art, nature
walks and meditation
The conference began on the evening of Friday, the 23rd with an
introduction by facilitators David Langness and Steven Scholl, followed by
devotions. LuAnne Hightower and Steven Scholl lead the participants in
deeply moving devotional activities based on zikr.
The morning session of the next day began with a meditative spiritual walk,
lead by Teresa Langness and, after devotions, the participants heard three
formal presentations.
The first, 'The Mystical Path in the Writings of Shaykh Ahmad" by Juan
Ricardo Cole of the University of Michigan, was videotaped, with audience
questions and comments provided through a telephone hookup. Speaking of
Baha'u'llah's high praise of Shaykh Ahmad, Cole suggested that we can
benefit from his insights, particularly on meditation. Cole reminded the
audience that the Guardian urged the believers to learn to meditate but did
not prescribe any form. Therefore, Baha'is need to develop a way of
worship, both collective and individual, which has a mystic dimension and
we must look to the Writings for clues to evolve our own spiritual
practices.
The second presentation, " Baha-Maiden Dialogues," was an
exploration of the symbolism of the Divine Feminine by Terry Culhane of
Omaha, Nebraska, Speaking of the inherent presence of the feminine voice in
the Revelation of Baha'u'llah, Culhane suggested that the scriptural Maiden
can be regarded as the embodied remembrance of God, symbolized by the Dove,
and linked to similar symbolism in Islamic poetry and Christianity. Culhane
emphasized that the development of strong Baha'i communities requires the
recognition and honor of the Sacred through the devotional institution of
the Houses of Worship
The third presentation, by Nima Hazini of Albuquerque, New Mexico was
titled "Gnosis: The Quest for Perfection". Defining gnosis as spiritual and
intellectual activity leading to integrated knowledge of the levels of
reality, Hazini discussed the metaphysics of mysticism as it relates to the
three levels of reality, the physical world of thought and emotion, the
imaginal world of energy and the intangible and indescribable spiritual
world.
The afternoon session gave attendees a choice of activities: Teresa
Langeness' meditative nature walk, "A Walk with the Ancients, an art
video, "The Mystical Image," by Sonja van Kerkhoff, featuring poetry by
Sen McGlinn; a workshop on "A Mystical Experience Using Music" by Amir; a
class on "Exploring the Beginnings of Meditation" by Derek Cockshut and a
musical workshop on "Spiritualizing the Community with Music," by Lora
McCall.
A very special evening program was organized by Lora McCall and Terry
Culhane. Preceded by breathing and centering exercises by Erica Batdorf,
this program was perhaps one of the first commemoration of Darvish Sidq Ali
since the time of Baha'u'llah. Darvish Sidq Ali was a Sufi companion of
Baha'u'llah and, in Memorials to the Faithful 'Abdu'l-Baha tells us that
Baha'u'llah, "set apart a special night and He dedicated it to Darvish Sidq
Ali. He wrote that at every year...the dervishes should bedeck a meeting
place, which should be in a flower garden, and gather there to make mention
of God."
After the commemoration LuAnne Hightower and Steven Scholl lead
"Remembrance of God" zikr chanting.
On Sunday morning, after devotions and meditation, the final session of the
conference gave the participants a chance to consult about ways to develop
a devotional side of the Faith equal to its administrative side. Everyone
recognized that the Baha'i community must give believers a spiritually
enriching and satisfying community life. Dr Amin Banani reminded the
friends that there are already rituals in the Faith which can satisfy our
yearning for a more mystical communion with God, such as the daily
Obligatory Prayers, with their choreography and the Fasting Prayers with
their repetitive refrains which lend themselves to zikr expression.
The conference ended after lunch, leaving the participants eager for the
next time!
Reported by Sandra Fotos
Association for Baha'i Studies, Japan
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduThu Mar 21 10:45:42 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 22:02:26 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Masqud
Sen wrote:
> I'm interested in the Lawh-i-Masqud discussion, beginning with the
> following passage (p 167-8):
> Such exhortations to union and concord as are inscribed
> in the Books of the Prophets by the Pen of the Most High
> bear reference unto specific matters; not a union that would
> lead to disunity or a concord which would create discord.
I think that often we Baha'is are too prone to compromise, in the name of
unity. There are times and places for unity, and sometimes being unified
with a person compromises a more important spiritual principle. There
are times, for example, where the Master said that anger is constructive,
such as with the liar, the tyrant and the thief. This is my
understanding -- to not make unity with others an absolute.
From burlb@bmi.netThu Mar 21 10:48:29 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 23:27 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re-traction
Dear Talischums:
I am compelled to make a re-traction. I accused you all of plotting against
me when the entire time it was really Nima and Ahang who were plotting
against you, or you who were plotting against Nima and Ahang -- I can't
quite recall because it was all second hand rumour from a reliable souse.
I was off devising new eleborate Naw Ruz rituals (Matzos & Bar-B-Q Pork
stuffed in a crab shell and served with harosis and moror) so you can
understand why I would be quick to believe almost anything. When I came to
my senses I was told that I also accused Sonja of being the "Queen of
Nederlander Decopage & Macreme" and demanded to know why the German House of
Worship looks likes *THAT*.
Burl (insecure lay clergy artist)
why *does* it look like that, anyway?
*************************************
MAN OVERBOARD by Burl Barer is still only $19.95 and may be ordered from any
bookstore. ISBN#: 1-56901-815-4 Buy Yours Today!
********************
From iskandar@ns.moran.comThu Mar 21 10:48:57 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 06:15:34 -0500
From: "Iskandar Hai, M.D."
To: "'talisman@indiana.edu'"
Subject: RE: primary sources
Abdu'l-Baha did not claim He received "Wahy" (Divine Revelation, Divine Inspiration, or whatever the translation is) from God, did He?
Bye,
Iskandar
----------
From: Sadra[SMTP:sadra@rt66.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 1996 10:28 AM
To: Doug Myers
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: primary sources
>
> My question is this dear friend[if I may call you that as I feel I know a
> little about you from your postings on Talisman], what is your definition of
> primary texts in this case?
>
> Because of Baha'u'llah's Kitab-i-Ahd & Kitab-i-Aqdas and 'Abdu'l-Baha's Will
> and Testament I included the Guardian and the House of Justice in the term
> primary texts.
>
Dear Doug--
Since the Bab, Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha are the Three Central Figures
of the Baha'i Faith respectively, therefore Their Writings (and
especially those of Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha) constitute the primary
texts of this Faith. While Shoghi Effendi was the head of the Faith, and is
the Guardian, and the House its current head, nevertheless since neither
one was/is recipient of Divine Inspiration (in the sense of
'wahy' or 'revelation') nor the Centre of the Covenant, which is the sole
function of the Master, or in any way, shape or manner of equal rank to the
Manifestation & His immediate Successor, hence their corpus cannot be, IMO,
considered primary in the way that that of the Central Figures is but should
be, rather, looked upon as secondary albeit complimentary. Sen, Juan,
Ahang or John can correct me if I'm wrong, though.
Happy-Naw Ruz to one and all!
regards, Nima
**************************************************************
* Paradox is a characteristic of truth. What communis opinio *
* has of truth is surely no more than an elementary deposit *
* of generalizing partial understanding, related to truth *
* even as sulphurous fumes are to lightning. *
* *
* --From the correspondence of Count Paul von Wartenburg *
* and Wilhelm Dilthey *
**************************************************************
From lwalbrid@indiana.eduThu Mar 21 10:49:35 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 09:49:08 -0500 (EST)
From: lwalbrid
To: DEREK COCKSHUT
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Fwd: a bunch of thanks
Dear Derek, your posting has just ruined my morning. The thought of our
dear, sweet Burl being hominiplated has brought me nearly to the point of
sobbing. (I would sob but John becomes very upset if I get anything,
even tear drops, on the computer keys. He is still so moody. It doesn't
seem to matter what I do with his marmalade.) Anyway, back to Burl. I
have visions of him (hominid, that he is) being cast in bronze or
whatever and then hung (or is it hanged) on the wall. We would only be
able to see him, not read his sweet, satirical words anymore. What good
would that be? I mean, do YOU want to see Burl hanging on YOUR wall?
What a thought. Oh, the tears are beginning to flow again. I think he
would be advised to drop the Arthur project. The love life of Bosch
teachers/administrators would be a far more fitting topic for his
particular style of writing.
I do wish you would convince Mark that I write a dandy letter of
permission and that I would be more than happy to assist him. Now that
my kids are nearly grown I tend to feel so useless. Writing such
letters of permission would make me feel needed and wanted again. Love,
Linda
From nineteen@onramp.netThu Mar 21 10:50:03 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 09:04:32 -0600 (CST)
From: "Richard C. Logan"
To: "Mark A. Foster" , Talisman
Subject: Points of view
Dear Mark,
It is beyond me to understand why you have been receiving so much
criticism. From what I can see you have expressed yourself under all
circumstances in a mild and self-effacing manner. Quite frankly, this
hail of scorn would be withering to most individuals.
I believe you were acting in good faith by asking the House the questions
you did--we are not obliged to be restrained by some imagined *Code of
Silence*. Why your actions have been interpreted as a breach of the
ethos of the group I don't know, but I feel everyone should be allowed to
pursue their involvement with Talsiman, as Baha'is, and not be measured
as members of a sub-group within the Faith, regardless of their
relationship to that group.
The polarization within Talisman need not be antagonistic. However, the
issues in play seem to touch upon the core of the friends belief
structures and bring out hostilities that are quite possibly unconscious.
I would suggest that if we cannot act with some measure of restraint we
will only have those who agree with us to discuss these issues. We
cannot assume we have all the answers. All too often Baha'is of
differing views are driven off Talisman under circumstances that can only
be described as "survival of the fitest". I hope we won't be reduced to
a situation where we simply congratulate each other on seeing things the
same way and hoot the rest off the list.
Richard
Richard C. Logan nineteen@onramp.net
Maintain HomePage "The Baha'is of Lubbock"
http://rampages.onramp.net/~nineteen/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
How manifold are the truths which must remain unuttered until the
appointed time is come! Even as it has been said:
"Not everything that a man knoweth can be disclosed, nor can
everything that he can disclose be regarded as timely, nor can every
timely utterance be considered as suited to the capacity of those who
hear it." --Gleanings from the writings of Baha'u'llah
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From lwalbrid@indiana.eduThu Mar 21 10:50:42 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 10:09:49 -0500 (EST)
From: lwalbrid
To: John Dale <73043.1540@compuserve.com>
Cc: TALISMAN-LIST ,
Baha'i-Sci-of-Real-List ,
Baha'i-st-List ,
Peter Conn ,
Cheshmak A Farhoumand ,
Ronald GLOSSOP , Vonda McCrae ,
Cynthia McDaniel , "I. Olson"
Subject: Re: The Gender of the UHJ - Simply a Symbol of Baha'u'llah?
Welcome to Talisman! This is just the sort of topic we handle here. You
have come to the right place. We have already hashed this out endlessly
but it is a topic that won't go away so why not go over it again?
Perhaps talking about it as a symbol of Baha'u'llah as a male is as good
an answer as any other. However, this answer just reaffirms the common
belief that leadership is a male prerogative and that women are to be
excluded from the really important decisions being made. When the one
administrative body that can overturn any other decisions made anywhere
in the Baha'i world is all male, it is difficult to convince people that
men and women are truly seen as equal in the Baha'i Faith.
As I have said, we have discussed this issue from about every angle
imaginable and there are strong feelings about it, to say the least.
There are those who argue that Baha'u'llah really did not envision a
HOuse of Justice consisting only of men and there are those who dispute
this. There are those that say that say Shoghi Effendi had the last word
and those who argue that the HOuse could overturn his statement. We have
explored why there should be only men and why there should be women
allowed. Then, there are those who think it really wouldn't make any
difference one way or another. I don't know
if we can get any further with this, though I certainly wish we could.
This posting does not help you at all, I know. It is simply to let you
know that we have been around on this one. But no one is going to try to
shut you up if you want to try it again. Linda
From jcdhender@loop.comThu Mar 21 10:52:59 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 07:28:46 -0800
From: The Hendershots
To: 'Talisman'
Subject: Happy Naw-Ruz!
Happy Naw-Ruz to all!
I just wanted to send a note of appreciation to all of you Talismaniacs. I subscribed just around Ayyam-i-Ha and found that Talisman made my Fast and Naw-Ruz more interesting. Many of the postings and quibbles were good "food" for thought when real food wasn't allowed and helped me to take stock of my own Baha'i life in preparation for the new year.
It was lovely receiving the Garden of Justice to read and think about during the Fast; and my family enjoyed the prayer for Naw-Ruz by 'Abdu'l-Baha last night when the sun went down. The postings on Naw-Ruz and how it is celebrated in Iran even got me to clean the house yesterday in preparation for the New Day.
Thank you all. I wish everyone a good year.
Love,
Chris Hendershot
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlThu Mar 21 11:08:02 1996
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 11:06:03 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Masqud
I'm interested in the Lawh-i-Masqud discussion, beginning with the
following passage (p 167-8):
Such exhortations to union and concord as are inscribed
in the Books of the Prophets by the Pen of the Most High
bear reference unto specific matters; not a union that would
lead to disunity or a concord which would create discord.
This is the station where measures are set unto everything, a
station where every deserving soul shall be given his due.
Well is it with them that appreciate the meaning and grasp
the intent of these words, and woe betide the heedless.
Who can gloss this, for one who cannot appreciate the meaning and grasp
the intent?
Sen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen McGlinn ph: 31-43-3216854
Andre Severinweg 47 email: Sen.McGlinn@RL.RuLimburg.NL
6214 PL Maastricht, the Netherlands
***
When, however, thou dost contemplate the innermost essence of things,
and the individuality of each,
thou wilt behold the signs of thy Lord's mercy . . ."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From jrcole@umich.eduThu Mar 21 11:26:34 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 11:06:02 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Happy Naw Ruz
Dearest Friends:
I'm back from my trip to Morocco, and have finally read all my
accumulated Talisman messages, benefitting, as usual, from the
discussions and the information presented.
I want to wish you all a blessed and joyous Naw-Ruz, and a new year full
of successes both for you and yours and for our beloved Cause of God.
I read all the posts about "laity" and "scholars" and "insecurity" and
past bitternesses, and was saddened that we have not made more progress
in a year and a half than that. But I did want to assure Mark Foster of
my high regard for him, for his intellectual contribution to Talisman,
and for his good intentions in foster-ing a sense of egalitarianism in
the community, with which I fully concur (as I am sure he knows). I wish
you, Mark, with a special warmth, a joyous Naw-Ruz and ensuing year. If
there was in fact, as some have suggested, any element of spite in your
actions (which I am not in a position to judge), I forgive you and hope
by-gones can be by-gones.
Because of professional and family obligations, I fear I am going to have
to be far less active on Talisman for a while than I have been, but I
hope to share some thoughts and results of researches with you all from
time to time.
Let us all take advantage of the New Year, literally "New Day," to put
behind us old grudges and wounds, to renew ourselves as complete and
integral spiritual beings, ready to give, and to forgive, without
sacrificing that analytical incisiveness and critical edge that gives
Talisman its special flavor and allows us to deepen in a new and more
effective way.
much love to you all - Juan
From lwalbrid@indiana.eduThu Mar 21 12:58:23 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 12:04:00 -0500 (EST)
From: lwalbrid
To: Stephan Dimitroff
Cc: talisman@majordomo.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The Gender of the UHJ - Simply a Symbol of Baha'u'llah?
Dear Stephan,
You must be new to Talisman. Otherwise, you would know that if you would
decide to say something to offend me, yo
you must stand in a very long line that forms on the right just behind
an English economist who is always advocating that the Baha'is celebrate
Adam Smith Day as the tenth Baha'i holy day and a Jewish satirist whose
problems start with the fact that he lives in a place called Walla
Walla. Behind these two are all sorts just dying to throw snowballs,
tomatoes or whatever vile debris they happen to have at hand in my
direction. Of course, the line is longer or shorter
ending on exactly what I have most recently posted.
I certainly would not take offense at your posting. Just wait until
you see what I aaccusted to.4inda~4~4~te 1 Mar 1996, Stephan
Dimitroff wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Mar 1996, lwalbrid wrote:
>
> > In bahai-st today:
> >
> > Welcome to Talisman! This is just the sort of topic we handle here. You
> > have come to the right place. We have already hashed this out endlessly
> > but it is a topic that won't go away so why not go over it again?
>
> I can't stop laughing. I don't know if that was your intent, but I think
> this is the funniest thing I have read in a long time. I hope I have not
> offended you. If I do offend, please consider that you have brought me
> no small joy on New Year's Day.
>
> Happy Naw-Ruz,
> S.
>
> Stephan Dimitroff http://www.kmtt.com
> Work: (206) 233-1037 (voice) (206) 233-8979 (fax)
> Home: (206) 838-1498 (Sea) (206) 952-6007 (Tac)
> --------- --------- ---------
> These fruitless strifes, these ruinous wars,
> shall pass and the Most Great Peace shall come.
> Baha'u'llah
>
>
From belove@sover.netThu Mar 21 13:08:12 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 20:27:06 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: Alma Engels , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Covenantal Issues was Re[2]: Talisman as Comedy
[The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set]
[Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set]
[Some characters may be displayed incorrectly]
Applause for the questions and the spirit of this inquiry.
On Wed, 20 Mar 1996 10:37:11 -0700 Alma Engels wrote:
but where
>does it say that Baha'is should be the deliberate source of tests for other
>Baha'is?
As my Jewish uncle would say: 'But who else? You wouldn't want it from a stranger would you?'
I know just what you mean! Beside, anyone else you could just ignore.
Philip
From belove@sover.netThu Mar 21 13:08:32 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 96 07:46:51 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: Bob Switzer ,
Steve Proskauer , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: more apologies
I keep receiving multiple copies of a frivolous post I sent out on the 19th and I'm concerned that my friends are getting it too. All the copies are dated as though sent on the 19th, all from the same time, and I don't know why it keeps happening. deepest apologies. I feel as though I'd made a minor joke and it keeps getting repeated back to me. It's like a strange version of hell. I'm tempted to search my character for the hidden message from the cybernet/universe.
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Alan Belove
Anagram: Plain Livable Hope
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 03/21/96
Time: 07:46:51
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A. Einstein
From 72110.2126@compuserve.comThu Mar 21 16:04:40 1996
Date: 21 Mar 96 14:01:04 EST
From: David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com>
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: The Naw-Ruz present
Dear Talismanians,
A hearty welcome to John Dale, whose remarkable first posts made eminent
sense and revealed a mind whose depth and capacity for nuance I've long
respected.
And a very happy Naw-Ruz to one and all!
Last night, at our community's celebration, a believer came who hadn't
been active for many years, even though she had lived in our city since
birth. I spent some time talking to her, trying to make her feel
welcome (ever notice how Baha'is sometimes tend to shun "newcomers" in
our midst, even though they're Baha'is, too? Very puzzling.), and just
generally chatting about her period of inactivity, which I found helpful
to address directly. I told her that even Baha'u'llah withdrew from the
community for two years, and that seemed to make her feel less alienated
in some way.
But she told me something I wanted to pass on to all of you. She said
that what drew her back to activity was the sense she had gotten in
recent Baha'i publications, which represented her only contact with the
Faith for years, that we as a community were attempting to deal more
directly with problems, and not "sweep them under the rug and pretend
anymore." She had been especially heartened by some of the recent
exchanges in the American Baha'i, and she specifically mentioned two,
one being Peter Khan's recent talk about mental tests, which had a
significant impact on her thinking.
"When I used to be active," she told me, "I thought there was an enormous
amount of pressure in the community to be perfect. After a while I
figured either everyone was perfect except me, or they were all troubled
like I was and faking it. Maybe now that's starting to change."
At any rate, I thought her sentiments were the nicest Naw-Ruz gift I've
gotten in a long time.
Love,
David
From L. Thu Mar 21 16:05:33 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 20:53:16 +0100 (MET)
From: L.
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: new prayer
I hope you all had as enjoyable a Naw-Ruz celebration as we had. We
celebrated the beginning of the new year with the German-speaking Belgian
Baha'is.
The Naw-Ruz prayer by Abdu'-Baha and translated by Shoghi Effendi, which Dr.
Armstrong-Ingram so kindly posted, is not unpublished. It was probably
published in *Star of the West*. I say probably because I did not note down
where I photocopied it from. It might have been *Baha'i News*, but the
typeset looks like that of *Star of the West*. I suspect the same is true
for the other "unpublished" translations Dr. Armstrong-Ingram found.
Probably Abdu'l-Baha's Naw-Ruz prayer was not included in the prayer book to
save space. Perhaps the editors did not see the utility of including two
prayers which could be used only once a year and gave priority to the prayer
revealed by Baha'u'llah.
Sincerely,
L.
From Member1700@aol.comThu Mar 21 16:06:32 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:23:01 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Naw-Ruz greetings!
My last message, with no subject, was actually a Naw-Ruz card. The computer
ate the first couple of sentences. (Well, computers have to live too, I
guess.)
Anyway, Joyous Naw-Ruz greetings to all. (You know that Kalimat Press HAS
published a book on the subject, right?)
Many thanks to Jackson for bringing Shoghi Effendi's translation of
'Abdu'l-Baha's prayer for Naw-Ruz to light! More, Jackson, more!
Tony
From Member1700@aol.comThu Mar 21 16:06:53 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:30:49 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The Gender of the UHJ - Simply a Symbol of Baha'u'llah?
Dearest brother John:
I am afraid that there is no consensus on Talisman concerning reasons for
the exclusion of women from the House of Justice at this time--at least there
is none on Talisman. I, for one, believe that there is no reason for this
and that women can and should be elected to our Supreme Body in the future.
Anyway, we have had endless discussions of this issue on Talisman,
and--if you want several hours of reading material--we do have an archivist,
Eric Pierce, who can provide you will all the juicy details. Eric?
Warmest Naw-Ruz greetings,
Tony
From ahriazati@ccgate.hac.comThu Mar 21 16:08:39 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 96 12:35:36 PST
From: ahriazati@ccgate.hac.com
To: iskandar@ns.moran.com
Cc: rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Sources
Dear Iskandar, Allah'u'abha
Thank you very much for your message and sorry that it took
me long time to answer you. As to your questions regarding
the Typing project, I will send you a separate message explaining
the ways that you could assist us.
As to the INBA volumes that Ahang Rabbani has refereed to during his
postings on Talisman network- it stands for Iran National
Baha'i Archives. This term is refereed to two sets of collections:

1. It primarily refers to a volumes of manuscripts that they
total about 28 volumes. This is refereed to usually as INBA library.

2. The other set is refereed to as INBA volumes is the one which
Iran NSA, concerned about the preservation of manuscript materials,
produced a limited number of XEROX volumes reproduced from
originals in the possession of various bodies and individuals.Since
the materials in this set contain materials that are distinct from
those in INBA then some authors have refereed to it as INBAMC which
stands for INBA Manuscript collections.

One *****very important thing *** about this set is that IS NOT
checked by anyone on a very systematic fashions to determine the
fate of majority of it's contents specially the sections including
the writings of the Bab and Baha'u'llah.
To give an example, The volume #1 is titled as " The writings of
the Bab" which contains few works of which only ** ONE ** is by
the Bab and rest is by Yahya Azal.
Another example is volume 80 which Ahang listed once as 80a .
This volume was titled as " The writings of the first Believers of
the Bab along with some of the Bab's writings" Almost the whole
thing in this set was the work of YAHYA AZAL. This is why later
on it was replaced by a new volume number 80. So there was no 80a
or 80b rather it was a ** COMPLETE** replacement.
In the volumes containing the writings of Baha'u'llah
there are *** MANY *** errors found even in a tablets
that are already PUBLISHED.
Considering the above facts, I do not think we should use this
set as a reference point for any SERIOUS scholarly work that we
are doing such as the one which Sen is undertaking. Until such
time that we have a very sound idea about this set. The work
is being done to achieve this goal.

As to the list itself, there are 105 volumes of which 98 are the
actual works and the rest is the LISTING of those works (* vols.
100-106 *) and vol. 70 contains the list of published works .

The title for number 5 and 6 in Ahang's list is correct but
the author of the two volumes containing the notes on Aqdas
is not Fadil-i- Mazanderani rather it is Fadil-i YAZDI.
In short, my humble experience on working on the materials
in this set , AS THEY ARE RIGHT NOW, will not be that useful
and we should avoid referring to them as the source for our
thoughts.
With warmest regards; Habib Riazati
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlThu Mar 21 17:01:01 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 22:40:40 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: women & UHJ
Dear John,
an interesting thought. 9 is the number of Baha so it is symbolic
that there be 9 members. But in practice there may be more and
there are still a 'symbolic' nine/baha of them, right?
And male membership is symbolic of the fact that the
Manifestation chose to grace a male body this time round, but in
practice there may be women members too, while the House would
remain symbolicaly male, right? Nine men and ten women to make a
nice round 19?
Or was this maybe not where your analogy between maleness and nineness
was heading?
As you will see from the brief abstract of Terry Culhane's paper at the
Mysticism conference, there are good grounds for considering
Baha'u'llah's Manifestation Soul (as distinct from his human soul) as
feminine. Prima facia, one might think that this would indicate that
only other people with feminine souls should be members (following
your symbolism argument), but this would be to confuse a symbol with
an imitation. A crown is a symbol of a king, but the crown doesn't
resemble the king, it re-enacts the idea of a human king in a lower
level of reality (the material). So if the Manifestation Soul is indeed to
be thought of as feminine (the maid of heaven), it doesn't follow that
the members of the House of Justice should also have feminine souls.
To be symbols of that reality, they should reflect it, but at a lower
level of reality. The symbolic reflection of that great feminine principle
is therefore not a feminine soul, but a feminine body, and a beautiful
one. For the most consumate symbolism, therefore, membership of the
Universal House of Justice should be restricted to beautiful young
women under the age of 19.
To get a little serious, I think that the diplomatic response of the world
centre staffer was perfect. There is no explanation which has any
degree of consensus acceptance (including your own rather original
one, first because no-one has had a chance to hear it
previously, and second because it could be extended to
exclude all non-Persians, who cannot symbolize Baha'u'llah quite
as well as Persian gentlemen can, and the non-Persians in their
foolish attachment to liberal agendas and western preconceptions
have resisted this mightily).
There is also insufficient consensus that the various arguments in
the Writings against the exclusion of women are strong enough
to warrant opening membership to women (The decision is the
House of Justice's, of course, but the need to preserve the unity of
the community makes it unlikely that any step would be taken
which might undermine the perceived legitimacy of the House in
they eyes of any substantial portion of the community). Thus far,
we are still in the situation where these arguments cannot even
be formally published and circulated in the Baha'i community, so
an effective concensus on the issue is obviously a long way off.
The various arguments proposed to support the exclusion (women
are too compassionate, they have periods and children to look
after, etc etc) seem, if you will excuse the value judgement, too
silly to have any chance of standing the test of time, while the
arguments in favour of admitting women do have at least the
flavour of a sound textual basis and historical plausability, but
they are not absolutely water-tight and are not widely known.
Thus consensus-forming on either side of the argument is
unlikely, and this question will be with us for a long time to
come.
However the arguments for and against have been aired on
Talisman. I've filed 131 incoming messages on the topic myself, and
I'm rather selective in what I keep, about 10% of all postings. (I
know you asked for just the best thinking on the topic, but
modesty prevents me saying how much I've posted myself.-) Do
you really want the whole set? In any case, I have a copy of the
paper "The Service of Women on the Institutions..." in my
archives, and when that has been inwardly digested you're
welcome to more.
Sen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen McGlinn ph: 31-43-3216854
Andre Severinweg 47 email: Sen.McGlinn@RL.RuLimburg.NL
6214 PL Maastricht, the Netherlands
***
When, however, thou dost contemplate the innermost essence of things,
and the individuality of each,
thou wilt behold the signs of thy Lord's mercy . . ."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From mfoster@qni.comThu Mar 21 18:33:15 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 16:30:23 -0600
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: Talisman
Subject: Re: Points of view
At 09:04 AM 3/21/96 -0600, Richard C. Logan wrote:
>It is beyond me to understand why you have been receiving so much
>criticism. From what I can see you have expressed yourself under all
>circumstances in a mild and self-effacing manner. Quite frankly, this
>hail of scorn would be withering to most individuals.
Hi, Richard -
Thank you for your kind remarks. The comments do not bother me much
personally. The Guardian did say that our greatest tests would come from our
fellow believers. However, I am, fortunately I suppose, accustomed to the
responses I have received off and on over the past year on Talisman. ;-)
Where the verbal *scoldings* _do_ concern me is on the level of Baha'i
community life. Honestly, concern is a bit of an understatement. I literally
got physically sick for several days this past week over certain postings on
this list. If we as Baha'is cannot be united in our diversity and tolerant
of each other, what reason can we give to others when inviting them to join
the world community of Baha?
>The polarization within Talisman need not be antagonistic. However, the
>issues in play seem to touch upon the core of the friends belief
>structures and bring out hostilities that are quite possibly unconscious.
Actually, I do not see why a polarization into different camps should exist
at all, but, at least from my observations, it clearly does. As I have
stated before, I think that the culture war of the larger society is being
played out on Talisman. As Baha'is, I don't think that we should have any
part of it. Yet, I see periodic postings here which exult in being
associated with a particular cultural or political position.
Certainly, there are "modernists," "liberals," "social democrats,"
"conservatives," "traditionalists," and "fundamentalists" in the Baha'i
community. However, from my POV, to the extent that these worldly ideologies
(or _false gods_) exist among us, it shows that we are not sufficiently
detached from the great divisions in human society. The consequences of that
attachment, IMHO, are played out regularly on the list. While we can learn
from all human world views, we should, to my understanding, be attached to
none of them. Our only focus, as I see it, should be on bringing forth into
reality the written Word of God:
It is incumbant on every man of insight and
understanding to strive to translate that
which hath been written into reality and
action. - Baha'u'llah
And to Juan:
I just read your message. Thank you for your kind remarks. I can state
without any qualification whatsoever that there was absolutely no
mean-spiritedness, or spite, as you say, in my decision to write the House
of Justice. My only purpose was to request a clarification on the points
that were raised at that time on Talisman, and I felt that the other list
subscribers would enjoy reading the response, too. As you could probably
sense from my own postings, I was very disappointed over the negative
reactions I received from a few of the friends. I suppose I found it
difficult to understand how writing to the Supreme Body, the "source of
good," could have been seen as tattling.
To the Light, Mark (Foster)
****************************************************************************
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * Sociologist of Religion * Full-Time College Faculty
Sociology, JCCC, 12345 College Blvd., Overland Park, KS 66210 * 913/768-4244
Dir., Reality Sciences Inst. * Acad. Dir., Found. for the Science of Reality
Staff, 4 Compuserve & AOL Forums * Owner, 3 EMail Lists * List Co-Moderator
Board of Dirs./Exec. V.P./Talent, Tektite Films * BBS Sysop (913/768-1113)
****************************************************************************
"The Prophets of God have been the Servants of Reality; Their Teachings
constitute the science of reality." - `Abdu'l-Baha
"The sciences of today are bridges to reality; if they lead not to reality,
naught remains but fruitless illusion." - `Abdu'l-Baha
From DaveTayl@cris.comThu Mar 21 18:34:02 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:32:27 -0500 (EST)
From: Dave Taylor
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Which camp should I be trying to get into? I thought there was only one.
>Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 16:55:10
>To: "Mark A. Foster" , lua@sover.net (LuAnne Hightower),
talisman@indiana.edu
>From: Dave Taylor
>Subject: Re: Which camp should I be trying to get into? I thought there
was only one.
>
>At 04:12 PM 3/20/96 -0600, Mark A. Foster wrote:
>
>>LuAnne -
>>
>>Thanks for your note. While I agree that some people have not been subjected
>>to harsh verbal assault from other Talismanians, that has not been the case
>>with everyone. I have myself been referred to as a fundamentalist, a
>>premodernist, a fascist, and other labels on Talisman, and I have seen the
>>same, or worse, happen to others.
>>
>>To the Light, Mark (Foster)
>>
>
>Dear Earnest Mark!
>
>Do you have to take offense at being identified with these various
positions? Speaking for myself, I am a fan of Marinetti and Boccioni and
Ezra Pound and Emil Nolde,even Leni Refenstahl (all fascists), as well as
D.W. Griffith (glamorizer of the Ku Klux Klan) and such serious avowed
Communists as el Lizitsky, Sergei Eisenstein and Natalia Gonchorova as well
as that famous commissar Kandinsky and such "fellow travellers" as Picasso
and Woody Guthrie and Pete Seeger as well as such quitessentially "decadent"
artists as George Grosz and Andy Warhol. I see the faith reflected in every
mirror, however tarnished or distorted(such as myself), as the faith
represents the height of -all- human aspirations, and, as such, aspects of
its truth can be found everywhere(even,at times, in the Baha'i Community
itself) however mishandled or misused. The principle of the oneness of
humanity requires that we recognize this and extend our sympathies as
broadly as we can to bring together the "sparks" embedded wherever there is
life(to use a Jewish metaphor.) So, I have sympathy for some ideals imbedded
in fascism, as also communism and anarchism and every other ism i can think
of. (I am particularly fond of what you have labelled a form of
"neo-Lutheranism," Mark, as you know.) This doesn't mean I accept all these
contradictory movements uncritically, of course, but they all represent
human aspirations and as such bear some relation to the currents of
progressive thought within the Faith and without. Many writers have noted,
for example, the strong influence of fascist ideologies on the development
of modernist art and architecture, and the initial -support- of fascist
movements and govenments for modernism. Also, strong connections between
fascism and post-modernism exist (through Heidegger,for example). And when
Italy and,especially, Germany turned against modern art, their polemic bore
striking resemblance to the anti-modernist polemic not only of the Soviet
Union(which also had initially supported modernist abstract art) but also to
that of Shoghi Effendi, who also spoke of modern art in terms of "decadence"
and "the prostitution of art and literature."( This is more than a
coincidence of terms, by the way, but reflects a strong current of Western
criticism at the turn of the century, as in, for example, Spenser,Max Nordau
and even in August Forel's international bestseller of 1905, "The Sexual
Question." (see"Expressionism,Art and Idea" by Donald E. ,Yale
University Press,1987) At the same time, the Faith remains the Faith, and
I can look sympathetically on movements working to erode the moral standards
upheld by the faith, even regard them as necessary to the correct
understanding and ultimate embrace by humanity of those standards, without
arguing at all that the laws and standards of the Faith should be changed.
Traditional moral standards rest, after all, on jerrybilt foundations
hastily and carelessly put together in the face of the collapse of the
religious and moral authorities of the old order in the last century and
thus are inherently flawed and unstable. The faith is here to heal the
alienation, the disruption which the faith itself can be said to have
caused, the crisis which charecterizes modernism. The future cannot be
pre-modern or modern or even post-modern but must involve elements of
traditional stable societysuch as the traditional sense of the human
community as a single organism with strong and vital elements of modern
individualism and relativity.
>
>
>
>And so, Mark, when someone identifies you,for whatever reason, with fascism
or fundamentalism or whatever, say, as Walt Whitman did, "Yes! I contain
multitudes!" If someone were to question the covenantal orthodoxy of my
position, I would endeavor to sharpen my limits to keep my reasoning within
bounds. I would not be offended. I am always struggling to get at a
universal vision without falling into the abyss of "everything is permitted."
>
>Bliss and Fire and even Coca Cola,
>
>dave taylor
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Love's a stranger to earth and heaven too
In him are lunacies seventy and two (Seven Valleys of Baha'u'llah)
Love does not care for good reason
Love forever heals the wounds it makes (from a poem written when i was
clinically insane)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From osborndo@pilot.msu.eduThu Mar 21 18:34:32 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:34:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Zhang Osborn
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Aha & Haha / Nuclear Talisman
Allah'u'Abha Friends!
A couple of well intended non-sequiteurs from out here in left field on
this New Day... One of several reflective postings with which I'll close out
my participation on this list for a while.
1. Aha! & Haha!: Balance and Integration
The recent thread on Talisman as Comedy prompted some musing on sense of
humor, sense of wonder / awe, and other modes of emothion/thought/expression
which we see verbal reflections of in this medium. The idea that we should
detatch ourselves a bit from the content of the traffic on the list and try to
see the humor in our common struggles and predicaments has some merit. A
sense of humor can go a long way in helping to break tension & (indirectly)
build unity. Yet the cynic and the nihilist (no I'm not thinking of anyone
on Talisman!) also sees a kind of humor in life, but this yields only a
dull-eyed laugh. ANd the cynic and nihilist have a diminished sense of wonder/
awe.
I've long been interested in the connection between a sense of humor and a
sense of wonder. THe sense of wonder or awe is the ability to still be
impressed with the majesty and intricacy of creation. It is perhaps a matured
rather than lost innocence. This sense is cultivated in spiritual growth. In
tandem with a sense of humor it would seem to be a guard against cynicism.
THe sense of humor, for its part is the celebratory, joyful counterpart to
awe, our connection with action and living. We need both, it seems to me,
together and in some sort of balance. Anyway, this is my perspective so far.
On Talisman, it seems as if humor and wonder/awe are segregated. Some have
tried to their credit to introduce humor into the mix of messages. Generally
it is separate from the other messages, so far as I've noted, and sometimes
it's just inside jokes or simply silliness. THe sense of wonder comes through
in the translations and in some of the commentary on these and other Writings.
I don't know how it would be to integrate both humor and awe more in the
intellectual discussions--I'm not even sure how it can be done. But it would
be an interesting evolution.
2. Nuclear Talisman: Fission to Fusion? (or Evolving Metaphor?)
A thought occurred to me while in the shower one early morning during the
Fast. The interactions on Talisman as nuclear reactions. Sometimes seeming to
get out of control, then being brought under control. Sometimes individuals
play the role of graphite rods, other times the same individuals play the role
of the fuel and the rods (can anyone follow this??). In the process generating
heat and light, but also dangerous waste (some words/phrases can affect people
in a way and for a duration of time that we would never imagine when using
them; I often think of a quote of Baha'u'llah that the effect of a word can
last longer than that of an action [I'll try to remember to look it up]). The
principle of fission, of course is disaggregation, division of atoms.
Then I thought of fusion - the combination of atoms which results in more
energy than fusion (& an interesting commentary on the greater power of unity
on the atomic level) and no radioactive waste. What would that metaphor
represent in the functioning of a list like Talisman? COmbining of ideas?
Merging of perspectives / points of view? Bringing minds and hearts together
for the Cause of God? Maybe there's some "fusion" happening already on this
list (as well as other Baha'i lists). Can that be enhanced and the dynamic of
"fission" be reduced? How?
In any event, I think it is useful to try to see what Talisman will be
accomplishing in the future. At the outset of every endeavor it is incumbent
to look to the end of it (paraphrase of Baha'u'llah). A list with ongoing
discussions does not have an "end" in the sense that discrete endeavors do, but
it has impacts and effects and these perhaps can be anticipated at various
points in the future. Furthermore, lists often tend to go through evolutionary
phases--change is inevitable. A metaphor such as this or a better one might
help to frame our understanding of that evolution and perhaps to guide it
within the context of the growth and development of the Baha'i community.
(In addition to a metaphor, and even before same, should be an anchoring or
centering in the Writings. This I'll try to address in a brief comment on the
Lawh-i-Maqsud.)
Happy New Year to all!! Don Osborn osborndo@pilot.msu.edu
From alma@indirect.comThu Mar 21 18:36:05 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:36:35 -0700
From: Alma Engels
To: "Richard C. Logan" ,
Talisman
Subject: Re: Points of view
Richard, you chose an excellent subject for the presentation of this
message. And I would like to present a different point of view.
You speak of a "hail of scorn" for Mark. And there have been some negative
comments about the way he presented Talisman to the UHJ. As you note, he
had every right to present the matter to the House. But those Talismanians
who thought there was misrepresentation also had every right to state that.
Somehow it seems hard for anyone person to state things in a balanced manner
(me excluded of course!!!!!!!!).
Something else that occurs to me when we discuss "hails of scorn" is how
very one-sided your concern and that of many others here seems to be. If
Mark was scorned, it was no more, and probably to a lesser, extent than
David was after he posted his retraction and Counsellor Birkland posted a
long message which was essentially what the NSA of the USA told him
(Counsellor Birkland). Though I no longer have the posts, I remember an air
of smugness and condemnation of David in several messages here. I for one
reserved judgement thinking that the David I knew from Talisman could not be
as the House depicted unless he had multiple personalities. But many
thought they had all the information they needed and that justified their
posts. Since then David has given us additional information which makes the
situation clear and shows that he acted in good faith. Whether the NSA
acted deliberately or simply was clumsy in how it handled the situation (and
I incline to the latter view as the right information may not have reached
the right person at the right time), it did misrepresent David and present
him in a very negative manner. Now I wonder when the situation has been
cleared up, we are not seeing posts on Talisman publicly acknowledging that
David was wrongly judged here. Seems to me that unless and until we can
acknowledge our mistakes, we and the Faith have little chance of fulfilling
our destiny.
Finally you state:
> All too often Baha'is of
>>differing views are driven off Talisman under circumstances that can only
>>be described as "survival of the fitest
I think this is a very one-sided statement. In the year I have been here I
have seen many join Talisman and find it not exactly as expected. That
there were points of view presented here that are only infrequently seen
elsewhere. Some of these unsubscribed as they decided Talisman was too
disturbing and not for them. That is fine. No email list is for everyone.
I, myself, find bahai.women.converse stultifying and no longer subscribe to
it. But some others who joined Talisman and were disconcerted at what was
posted, immediately replied with an opposing opinion which was presented as
THE Baha'i opinion seemingly confident that this would clarify the matter
once and for all on Talisman. And these people seemed surprised when
well-supported counter opinions were presented. Some of these people did
leave Talisman. And some learned to present their opinions in ways
acceptable to Talisman. Today they post these opinions and defend them.
That is how Talisman is designed to work. One can join any number of lists
if one wants to see all or nearly all posts made in uncritical way. It
seems to me a misuse of Talisman to attempt to force it into such a mold.
Strong statements from me for the start of the New Year. May it be a
blessed one for each and every one of you and may we all grow in our
understanding -- and most especially may we all grow in our love of God and
Baha'u'llah.
To tread the path of Love Alma Engels
Is no mere game. alma@indirect.com
For only one
Out of many thousands
Can persevere in His Love. (Tahirih)
From DaveTayl@cris.comThu Mar 21 18:36:48 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:43:45 -0500 (EST)
From: Dave Taylor
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re:My Strange Ideas and Attitudes Toward Homosexuality In Japan and the US
>Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 16:54:43
>To: Talisman@indiana.edu
>From: Dave Taylor
>Subject: Re:My Strange Ideas and Attitudes Toward Homosexuality In Japan
and the US
>
>
>I have been "out of commission" for awhile, but I cannot return without
briefly picking up this old thread which I left dangling. It started when
Stephen Friberg wrote that homosexuality is an American preoccupation of no
concern to the Japanese, who are tolerant but never discuss such things.
This I found hard to believe, and, as Stephen admits, homosexuality is a
staple of Japanese talk shows. But the attitude of indifference Stephen
cited does exist, as it existed in Victorian England or at the same time in
France, and, I asserted for similar reasons having to do with assumptions of
male privelege. (in switching providers I lost everything, so i cannot
repost even if someone wants me to:-( )
>I asserted my own view, that the modern perception of homosexuality as a
"condition" has created not only the view of homosexuality as a pathology
but also the emergence of a worldwide homosexual community as a pressure
group whose uncontestable moral authority in the face of crisis and
opposition and multi-dimensional success will eventually lead to the
universal recognition of homosexual potentials in humans. At that point
neither "homophobia" or "homosexuality" as we know them will cease to exist
but both will take milder, quieter forms, as they will not be seen as
exclusive burdens of any portion of the population. As such sexual feelings
become more available to all, the need to "act them out" will lessen, and
the faith's prohibition against sexual activity" no matter how devoted and
fine the love may be between members of the same sex" will not appear
extraordinary, although the idea that some would quietly "fail" to always
avoid such activity will not appear extraordinary either. Thus "gay
liberation" will itself in the fullness of time lead to a state of society
that will ease the present tension over this issue. Thus my position is
both dialectical and paradoxical, but it fits the facts as I understand them
and I am willing to discuss it. I acknowledge that the position of
homosexually oriented people in the Faith is difficult and will only get
more difficult for a significant period of time into the future, as the
trend toward openness continues, because their options for an open way of
life will be much greater outside the Faith and this open lifestyle will be
creative and productive.To a lesser extent this is also true for all liberal
sympathizers such as myself, as well as all of us who have found peace in
conventional marriage elusive, and doubtless the Baha'i position on
homosexuality will continue for some time to be one of the greatest barriers
keeping many good-hearted people out of the faith. The world needs many
non-Baha'is. At the same time, we are witnessing a flowering of explicit
homosexual culture that is a wonderful and necessary part of the formation
of the new world culture.
>
>At 12:05 AM 3/14/96 -0500, you wrote:
>>In a message dated 96-02-03 10:20:40 EST, friberg@will.brl.ntt.jp (Stephen R.
>>Friberg) writes:
>>
>>>Dear Dave:
>>>
>>>In your letter of Jan. 23, you raised several issues which concerned Japan.
>>>I want to reply to the points you raise, but before I do, let me briefly
>>>repeat some of your arguments [in parentheses].
>>>
>>>[To understand sexuality in Japan, you argued, it is necessary to consider
>>>the relationship of sexuality to the development of modern feminism.
>>>Japanese society, you argued, is repressive like Victorian England or 19th
>>>century France in its attitudes: Japanese society is oriented toward "male
>>>pleasure and prerogative."]
>>>
>>>The analogy is mistaken, I believe, and doesn't lead to an understanding of
>>>Japanese society.
>>
>I did not say that Japanese culture was derived from the British, but the
structural similarity in terms of attitudes toward sexual practice and
priviledge are striking, and in fact nothing in your description contradicts
what I have said!
>
>> Morality in Japan is mainly Confucian with a mix of
>>>Shinto purification rites and Buddhist otherworldlyness. The emphasis is on
>>>correctness in relationships - family, company, community - with built in
>>>safety valves. Let me illustrate a typical safety valve: the drunken
>>company
>>>picnic under the blooming cherry trees. Having consumed sufficient
>>>quantities of beer, whiskey, or sake, the younger worker insults the boss
>>and
>>>his-coworkers to their face, saying what he really feels. The next day, it
>>>is not mentioned, rather it is completely forgotten, in fact it *must* be
>>>forgotten. Such things are allowed when drunk.
>
>
>>>Popular culture for 400 years has had a similar safety valve: the ukiyo, or
>>>"floating world." The word and its associations come from Buddhism: this
>>>world is like an illusion, a mirage, it is unreal. So, take pleasure in its
>>>illusions, enjoy it when you can, throw discipline and its accompanying
>>>illusions to the side, at least for the night! This culture was the culture
>>>of the pleasure quarters, the special walled-in part of the cities where
>>>prostitution was allowed to flourish, where kabuki plays, ukiyoe Japanese
>>>prints developed, and where art, entertainment, prostitution, and the
>>>culinary arts produced the geisha house. In time, this popular culture
>>>broadened its appeal and almost became the culture!
>
>Again, this is strikingly similar to the 19th Ceentury European attitude.
In Europe as well actresses were famous as much for their erotic conquests
as for their conquests on the stage, and were assumed to be or have been
prostitutes and often were. Paris and London certainly had their "pleasure
quarters," and, while their esthetic may not have been as refined or open as
the Japanese, European artists appreciated Japanese poetry and art not only
for their formal innovations but for their expression of a way of life which
struck the Europeans as modern. You will recall, for example, that Degas, a
great connousseur of Japanese prints, lived in brothels for weeks at a time,
as did Toulouse Latrec.
>>>So, there always has been a certain permissiveness toward sexuality.
>>>Granted, men, of course, were allowed much more freedom than women. But it
>>>was the courtesan who was celebrated. Her freedom and boldness and beauty
>>>still thrills when we see the old popular prints, now highly priced
>>>collectors' items. This was not the everyday housewife's world, but it does
>>>not speak of a repressive society.
>
>"Repressive" is a funny word. One must always ask "repressive -for whom.-In
the sixties a number of factors, including "the pill" and the victory of
penicillan over syphilis led to a movement of "sexual liberation" which
proved to be so repressive for women, who were expected to bed free
gentlemen without expectation of commitment or respect, that it became one
of the launching points for the new wave of feminism which exploded in the
"70's. Similarly, 19th Century England and France were not sexually
repressive for gentlemen, and both saw a tremendous rise in the population
of prostitutes, a small number of whom, of course, were quite successful and
well- known, such as actresses like Sarah Bernhardt and others who were
lucky and clever enough to bed kings and the like. That the Japanese
tradition may have been older and had a religious justification rather than
the pseudo-scientific justifications used in Europe is no large distinction,
except that the Japanese system has proved more durable. Still, since World
War II, the Japanese system of sexual relations has come under tremendous
pressure and is undergoing change.
>
> [If you haven't yet, read the 11th
>>century
>>>story Genji Monogatori, the world's first novel and still one of the
>>>greatest. Written by a leisured noblewoman, it tells of a strangely amoral
>>>society, typified by pursuit of pleasure, and tempered by a Buddhist
>>>awareness of the vanity of it all!]
>>>
>>>Until recently, most Japanese were farmers, so farmers' attitudes toward
>>>these issues are very important for what you are considering. Japanese
>>>farming is different that European or American farming: plots are small,
>>>often flooded paddies, cultivation extensively by human hands, and organized
>>>around the family, with all helping. Men and women were often equals in
>>this
>>>world, or in the modern world of small shops and businesses. It is here
>>that
>>>you see why some thinkers still see Japan as a matriarchical society.
>>>
>In Europe too, traditional society was more egalitarian and inequalities
were consistently exxagerated by the effects of urbanization and
industrialization. See for instance, Peter Laslett's "The World We Have
Lost" for a description of pre-industrial English society.
>
>>>[As Japan becomes more open, perhaps through the influence of western
>>>feminism, attitudes toward women's sexuality will change. Correspondingly,
>>>attitudes toward homosexuality will change as "men are forced to imagine as
>>a
>>>human possibility a sustained sexual attraction for men." In a similar
>>>manner, you argue, "homophobia--fear of homosexuality, especially male
>>>homosexuality--rises as women assert themselves." Labeling of homosexuals
>>as
>>>"deviant" allows dominant heterosexual males to deny homosexual potential
>> in
>>>themselves.]
>>>
>>>What has happened is quite different. Women lately (i.e., the last ten
>>>years), like men, seem to see their youth as a time for sexual freedom
>>before
>>>marrying after, say, 27 years old or so. The newspapers report that this
>>>attitude has extended to the point that high school girls from ordinary
>>>families see nothing wrong in funding their clothes purchases by a trick or
>>>two. Missionaries chalk it up to the lack of a major religion, or at least
>>a
>>>new one. Buddhism was already over one thousand years old when it reached
>>>Japan, they point out.
>>>
>This sort of change is coming to America too. When I said that feminism
would be a stimulus for change I didn't mean that all the changes would be
ideal! Feminism isn't the only influence in the mix either, but these girls
you write of are certainly making their own choices, and when they find they
are getting a raw deal they will begin to speak up about it and ultimately
they will make themselves heard, especially they will hear each other. The
alternating waves of "sexual liberation" and feminist protest that have
characterized American experience will be discernable in Japan as well.
(here in the U.S. we are in a "post-feminist" phase.)
>>>Will feminism change things? What does this mean with relationship to
>>>homosexuality? These are not easy questions to answer: I don't have the
>>>feeling that women are suppressed in Japan as they often are or have been
>>>elsewhere. Taken advantage of economically? Yes. Not given an equal role
>>in
>>>public affairs in society? Yes. Downtrodden and suppressed? No. As a
>>>result, Japanese women seem to lack the anger that fuels feminism elsewhere.
>>
>>Famous last words. I wonder what the Princess would say, could she speak!
>>
>>>Will Japanese men be threatened by womanly sexuality? In the main, no. It
>>>doesn't seem to have bothered them for the last two thousand years. Why
>>>should it now?
>>
>Such a paradise! I think you might be missing something!
>>
>>>Will men give up their mistresses? I think so. Women don't like men who
>>>cheat on them and don't help take care of the family, and these days, they
>>>get to choose whom they marry.
>>>
>>>Will homosexuality be a big thing in the future? Well, its becoming popular
>>>on Japanese TV talks shows as a way to be a personality! Certainly, there
>>is
>>>a gay subculture. But, my guess is that the traditional attitudes will
>>>continue: there will be certain occupations, groups, etc., where it is
>>>acceptable and even fashionable, but these will be a "special quarters," a
>>>"floating world" off by itself, a safety valve, and Japan's family and
>>>work-centered mainstream culture will continue as it long has.
>
>This idea of Japan--you would think it was an island apart from the rest of
the world. That world has been ending for a long time--at least since 1853
when those ships sailed into Edo's harbor. Ghettos do not hold. Not Berlin,
not New York or San Francisco, nowhere, ever. We will all have to become
one people.
>
>yours,
>
>dave taylor
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Love's a stranger to earth and heaven too
In him are lunacies seventy and two (Seven Valleys of Baha'u'llah)
Love does not care for good reason
Love forever heals the wounds it makes (from a poem written when i was
clinically insane)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From mfoster@qni.comThu Mar 21 18:37:17 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 16:59:02 -0600
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: Dave Taylor , "Mark A. Foster" ,
LuAnne Hightower , Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Which camp should I be trying to get into? I thought there was only one.
Dave -
You sent your message to talisman@cris.com. I made the correction before
sending you this reply. Perhaps you will want to resend your original
message to Talisman.
>Do you have to take offense at being identified with these various
>positions?
I no longer take personal offense, but I did see it as divisive. I agree
that one may be influenced by a variety of positions. To me, that it
wonderful. We are here to learn from all human and spiritual wisdom -
filtered, IMO, through the Baha'i model of reality. My feeling, however, is
that one should not wholeheartedly commit oneself to a particular worldview.
For instance, both modernism and fundamentalism, when applied to religion,
represent, as I see them, imperfect human attempts to grasp something which
is not fully human. Personally, I think that we can gradually transcend this
tendency by looking at existence from a God's-eye viewpoint, i.e., from the
perspectives of the Teachings.
You have named some of the individuals and movements that have affected your
view. As I have said before, I have also been influenced by a variety of
theories and individuals, i.e., Sorokin's integralism, Durkheimian and
Marxian structuralism, philosophical hermeneutics, etc. To my understanding,
developing an appreciation for the products of the human spirit is
commendable. All truth comes from one Source - no matter what the channel.
To the Light, Mark (Foster)
****************************************************************************
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * Sociologist of Religion * Full-Time College Faculty
Sociology, JCCC, 12345 College Blvd., Overland Park, KS 66210 * 913/768-4244
Dir., Reality Sciences Inst. * Acad. Dir., Found. for the Science of Reality
Staff, 4 Compuserve & AOL Forums * Owner, 3 EMail Lists * List Co-Moderator
Board of Dirs./Exec. V.P./Talent, Tektite Films * BBS Sysop (913/768-1113)
****************************************************************************
"The Prophets of God have been the Servants of Reality; Their Teachings
constitute the science of reality." - `Abdu'l-Baha
"The sciences of today are bridges to reality; if they lead not to reality,
naught remains but fruitless illusion." - `Abdu'l-Baha
From abtavangar@geoenv.comFri Mar 22 00:53:56 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:35:27 -0900
From: Alex Tavangar
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Dangerous Grounds
My Buddy, Pal, Bro:
Forget about the umbrella. That won't do at all. You had better wear hip
boots, mask, rubber hat and suit and then get in the middle of the ring and
be ready to sing: "It is a good day to die." Are you kidding, you call this
mud slinging? Is this an understatement or what?
I think anyone who enters the unholy grounds of Talisman should at once say,
"Hail TaliCzar, those who are about to die salute you!" Of course, a few
hundred prayers for frimness in the Covenant would not be bad insurance either.
Dear Seekers After Truth,
I'd like to ask for a personal favor from Talisdom. Every time a juicy
topic comes along (which is quite often) and I begin to soak in the ideas
and enjoy the discourse, I am slapped in the face with what I consider mud
slinging (however subtle). I really don't want to have to step inside this
forum every time with my umbrella open.
Example:
> I am baffled how as a social scientist Mark Foster has not been able to
>understand a very simple thing and how he has so far been able to justify
>his adamant position the way he has.
What followed the above statement was not enhanced by this opening.
(I left out the personal specifics on purpose as my intent is not personal)
Thanks,
Alex B. Tavangar
From mfoster@qni.comFri Mar 22 00:58:06 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 19:18:22 -0600
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: Talisman
Subject: Re: Points of view
Alma -
You wrote:
>You speak of a "hail of scorn" for Mark. And there have been some
>negative comments about the way he presented Talisman to the UHJ.
>As you note, he had every right to present the matter to the House.
>But those Talismanians who thought there was misrepresentation also
>had every right to state that.
Sorry to harp on the subject, but I never posted my letter to the House of
Justice to this list. As far as I know, only myself and certain persons at
the World Centre have seen it. Therefore, I don't know what you mean by "the
way he presented Talisman to the UHJ."
To the Light,
Mark (Foster)
From PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.eduFri Mar 22 01:02:53 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 18:21:28 PST8PDT
From: "Eric D. Pierce"
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: archives/ Re: The Gender of the UHJ - Simply a Symbol of Baha'u'
Hi,
re:
> From: Member1700@aol.com
> Date sent: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:30:49 -0500
> To: Talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: Re: The Gender of the UHJ - Simply a Symbol of Baha'u'llah?
...snip
> Anyway, we have had endless discussions of this issue on Talisman,
> and--if you want several hours of reading material--we do have an archivist,
> Eric Pierce, who can provide you will all the juicy details. Eric?
> Warmest Naw-Ruz greetings,
> Tony
>
>From mid august 1995 until late september 1995, there at least 300
messages on or closely related to this topic. With "fat" email
header information included, the file containing the extracts of
these messages consists of:
29,079 lines

and is sized:
1,567,091 bytes.

The "zipped" (compressed) version is sized:
490,463 bytes.
I would estimate that at least 25% of the postings are of marginal
relevance and/or value.
The 300 messages included the multipart postings of the "Service of
Women" paper, and the letter from the Universal House of Justice to
New Zealand regarding the "Service" paper.
There are probably at least another 50-100 messages during the later
part of the fall 1995 period on the topic or related topics, but I
didn't have time to look further.
I can probably get my email software to jump through a few odd hoops
and get a "brief" list of the 300 messages email header info:
date/author/subject ...
for anyone that wants to narrow the search.
Drop me a private note if you want more info about these archives.
If you want to restrict distribution of any of your previous postings
on this topic, let me know.
Eric D. Pierce
(PierceED@csus.edu)
From Member1700@aol.comFri Mar 22 01:04:03 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 21:30:17 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Covenantal Issues
Dearest Alma:
I certainly appreciate your concerns about the damage that might be done
if we are to consider it legitimate and acceptable to throw accusations of
Covenant-breaking around on Talisman, or anywhere else in the Baha'i
community. It seems to me that your analysis of the difficulties with this
kind of talk is quite on the mark.
However, I very much doubt if anyone could use the recent statement of the
House of Justice to support a right to make such an accusation. The House
was rather careful in its wording concerning the right to raise issues of the
Covenant, and it seems to me that it was careful to focus any such discussion
on ideas, rather than individuals. The House writes:
> Thus, if any participant in an email discussion feels that a view put
>forward appears to contradict or undermine the provisions of the Covenant,
he
>should be free to say so, explaining candidly and courteously why he feels
>as he does. The person who made the initial statement will then be able to
>re-evaluate his opinion and, if he still believes it to be valid, he should
be
>able to explain why it is not contrary to either the letter or the spirit of
>the Covenant.
Of course, if anyone feels that an idea put forth by someone else is
precluded by the provisions of the Lesser Covenant, they they should have a
right to say so. As the House emphasizes this should be done courteously.
But, I think this is quite different than suggesting or implying that the
person offerring such ideas is actually a Covenant-breaker (or a
proto-Covenant-breaker, or a Covenant-breaker in the making, whatever). As
long as the discussion is focussed on the ideas being offerred, and one is
not questioning the motives or the sincerity of the speaker, one is certainly
within one's rights to raise the Covenant as an issue. And anyone is fully
within his rights to say why he feels that his views are fully within the
requirements of the Covenant (and the discussion will have to end there). It
seems to me that even Talismaniacs should be capable of this kind of
courteous exchange. After all, the Covenant is not a forbidden topic on
Talisman.
This is quite a different matter than an accusation of heresy, or a
statement that someone (as a person) is coming close to the edge of
Covenant-breaking. Such statements are indeed repugnant and are routinely
used within the Baha'i community to silence novel or unusual (or even new)
points of view. That is the kind of thing that I think is destructive, and
is clearly forbidden by the list rules.
Naw-Ruz greetings,
Tony
From alma@indirect.comFri Mar 22 01:04:30 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 21:09:04 -0700
From: Alma Engels
To: "Mark A. Foster" , Talisman
Subject: Re: Points of view
I apologize Mark for my imprecision. It would have been better if I had
said "based on the reply, the assumption of the way he...."
In peace,
Alma
At 07:18 PM 3/21/96 -0600, Mark A. Foster wrote:
>Alma -
>
>You wrote:
>>You speak of a "hail of scorn" for Mark. And there have been some
>>negative comments about the way he presented Talisman to the UHJ.
>>As you note, he had every right to present the matter to the House.
>>But those Talismanians who thought there was misrepresentation also
>>had every right to state that.
>
>Sorry to harp on the subject, but I never posted my letter to the House of
>Justice to this list. As far as I know, only myself and certain persons at
>the World Centre have seen it. Therefore, I don't know what you mean by "the
>way he presented Talisman to the UHJ."
>
>To the Light,
>
>Mark (Foster)
>
>
>
To tread the path of Love Alma Engels
Is no mere game. alma@indirect.com
For only one
Out of many thousands
Can persevere in His Love. (Tahirih)
From burlb@bmi.netFri Mar 22 11:03:01 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 96 23:25 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Water Heater from Hell
Happy New Year to all of you...and welcome back Juan Cole!
Today Warner Brothers called and offered me some money to write a book
proposal for them. It was not much money, but the proposal is only 15 pages
and I have a week to produce the first draft and a month to provide the
final version. I say OK because I am desperate and I want them to like me.
I get up (they called when I was asleep so I faked the negotiations by
muttering like Marlon Brando while fluffing the pillow) and come downstairs
to clean my office for Naw Ruz -- the New Year harvesting of empty Coke cans
is a family tradition -- when suddenly: the water heater explodes! It was a
scene out of Exodus. "Will you pay the plumber before he leaves?" asks the
nice lady from Mike Harvey Plumbing. "Sure" says me, figuring I can keep the
plumber hostage for at least a week. No such luck. He replaces the entire
water heater and presents a bill -- due before sundown -- for exactly $24.91
*more* than Warner Brothers will be paying me for those 15 pages. I am in
the hole again. What is the spiritual message of this Naw Ruz adventure?
Why is God plotting against me? I already know he is the best of plotters --
I read that in the Qu'ran -- but what is the wisdom of the water heater
exploding? The basement being soaked? The Naw Ruz party being moved to
someone else's house? Is God mad at me because I want to know why the
German House of Worship looks like *that*? Isn't everything that happens
really all about me and my wants? Aren't I the center of the universe, the
star of at least the Lesser Plan or the Most Least Plan?
Burl
PS: UPS wouldn't take my tractor, hence I am retracting my re-traction.
*************************************
MAN OVERBOARD by Burl Barer is still only $19.95 and may be ordered from any
bookstore. ISBN#: 1-56901-815-4 Buy Yours Today!
********************
From iskandar@ns.moran.comFri Mar 22 11:04:20 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 07:40:17