Logs of Talisman Discussions of Bahai Faith 3/96

From SBirkland@aol.comTue Mar 19 17:29:06 1996
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 15:12:05 -0500
From: SBirkland@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: "Retraction"
I have been reading with deepening concern the many messages reacting to
David Langness's posting on March 5, 1996 entitled, "Retraction." In an
attempt to resolve the confusion and perplexity reflected in these messages,
I obtained from the National Spiritual Assembly a summary of relevant details
that could shed light on the entire matter. Although it is not the custom of
Baha'i Assemblies to publicize details of cases of individual misconduct or
infraction of Baha'i law, the National Assembly has permitted me, because of
the issues that have arisen, to release the information provided me, as
follows:
-----------------------------------------------------

Concerning Mr. David Langness's email of 5 March 1996 posted on the
Talisman network, we hereunder provide a statement of essential details
for your use in clarifying the issues surrounding it.
Since the letter of 16 February 1996 addressed by the Universal House of
Justice's Department of the Secretariat to our National Spiritual Assembly
summarizes the background concisely, we quote the following extracts from it:
"The Universal House of Justice has received your faxed letter of 26
January 1996 concerning Mr. David Langness, and after having
considered the entire matter of his appeal, it has directed us to
convey the following.
"The case as it stood at the time of Mr. Langness's appeal last
November may thus be summarized. Mr. Langness, in an email message
posted on Internet to the Talisman list on 1 October 1995, criticized
and ridiculed the Baha'i judicial system, invoking images of show
trials of the Chinese', kangaroo courts of Stalinist Russia', and
secret proceedings of the current regime in Iran'. Rejecting and
distorting the regard for privacy in Baha'i judicial practice,
Mr. Langness accused the Baha'i institutions of abuse of power, in
support of which he purported to cite a personal example by making
the allegation that in 1988 the Secretary-General of the National
Spiritual Assembly removed his right to pilgrimage without the
knowledge and authority of either the National Spiritual Assembly or
the Universal House of Justice. The National Spiritual Assembly,
feeling that Mr. Langness was being deliberately untruthful in making
such an allegation, instructed him in a letter of 8 November 1995 to
post a correction within two weeks or face administrative sanctions.
He then appealed from the decision of the National Assembly in a
letter dated 20 November 1995 conveyed by email to the Universal
House of Justice. The House of Justice replied to his appeal in a
letter dated 7 December 1995 written on its behalf by the Department
of the Secretariat.
"Certain aspects of Mr. Langness's appeal have enlarged the
dimensions of the case. In his letter of 20 November 1995 to the
House of Justice, he wrote: If the National Spiritual Assembly
provides me with documentation showing that the Universal House of
Justice removed my right to pilgrimage, or if the Universal House of
Justice informs me that this is the case, I will certainly withdraw
this appeal and immediately issue the retraction the NSA has directed
me to make.' The Secretariat's letter of 7 December 1995 conveying
the reply of the House of Justice provided the documentation and the
confirmation he requested. Hence his failure until now to act in
accordance with his own assertion to the House of Justice raises
serious questions as to his motives; also of immense gravity is the
fact that he denied in his statements to the House of Justice itself
any knowledge of the authority behind the information he received in
1988 that he had been deprived of the privilege of pilgrimage to the
Baha'i World Centre for the time being, in spite of the fact that in
his telex to the House of Justice received on 18 May 1988, he
requested it to reconsider your decision barring me from
pilgrimage', and in his letter of 9 March 1992 to your National
Spiritual Assembly, he said: Since it was the Universal House of
Justice that removed my right to pilgrimage, I believe that only they
can restore it.' Altogether the foregoing summary depicts an
inadmissible violation of Baha'i conduct.
"The House of Justice feels, therefore, that your Assembly can now
take action...."
The documentation mentioned as having been provided to Mr. Langness
comprised the following items:
1. Telex from Mr. David Langness to the Universal House of Justice,
received on 18 May 1988 while he was en route to the Holy Land for
pilgrimage, asking it "to reconsider your decision barring me from
pilgrimage" In adducing a reason for this decision, he further said
in the telex: "I can only speculate that the reason for barring me is
my letter of 20 April 1988 and the controversy surrounding the
proposed Dialogue article. If so, I apologize for the strident tone
of that April 20th letter which I wrote and sent without proper
reflection."
2. The response of the Universal House of Justice, transmitted to the
National Spiritual Assembly of the United States on 19 May 1988, and
the message of that Assembly dated 19 May 1988 relaying this response
to Mr. Langness, c/o Hotelittre, Paris, France. The response said, in
part: "your pilgrimage to the Baha'i World Centre remains cancelled.
However, under the circumstances, you may visit the Haifa-Akka area
for three days to enable you to pray at the Holy Shrines."
Mr. Langness then proceeded to make such a visit.
3. The National Spiritual Assembly's letter of 8 June 1988 addressed
jointly to Mr. David Langness and three other believers involved in
the circulation of a paper entitled "A Modest Proposal". In that
letter the Assembly expressed concern about the preparation,
distribution, and content of the paper which it viewed as contrary to
Baha'i principles. Its concern prompted the Assembly to seek the
advice of the Universal House of Justice, to conduct an interview with
the authors, and ultimately to disapprove the publication of "A Modest
Proposal". The letter explains the reason for the attitude and
reactions of the Baha'i institutions, as indicated in the following
extract:
"As conveyed by the National Spiritual Assembly's representatives
in numerous meetings with various members of the Los Angeles group,
and most recently at the meeting held with the National Spiritual
Assembly, you have persistently placed yourselves in a position of
studied disrespect. You have tended to present yourselves as a voice
in opposition to the institutions, and your activities have displayed
a distinct political objective in that you have sought to achieve
compliance among Baha'is with your point of view outside the proper
administrative channels. Such actions promote conflict and contention
and are in essence subversive and divisive...."
4. The National Spiritual Assembly's letter of 4 April 1991 replying
to Mr. David Langness's letter of 6 March 1991, the receipt of which
he acknowledged in his letter of 9 March 1992 to the National
Assembly. The Assembly's letter provided an elaboration of the reason
already given for the sanction, including the following summary
statement:
"Independent attempts by individual Baha'is to canvass support for
their views among their fellow believers are destructive of the unity
of the Cause. Thus, in the case of "A Modest Proposal" it was not
the questions that were raised or the proposals put forth that were
primarily at fault, but rather the implicit manner in which it was
proposed to accomplish change in the community. Therefore the
concerns were based on the partisan marshalling of a group working to
bring pressure on the institutions of the Cause, and the intemperate
criticism employed."
5. Mr. David Langness's letter of 9 March 1992 to the National
Assembly in which he expressed the understanding that, "The original
sanctioning body, according to your initial letter removing my
pilgrimage right, and to the telephone call I received from Robert
Henderson while I was in Portugal en route to Haifa, was the Universal
House of Justice. Since it was the Universal House of Justice that
removed my right to pilgrimage, I believe that only they can restore
it."
In view of the situation as summarized above, the National Spiritual
Assembly sent to Mr. Langness a letter by certified mail dated 28 February
1996, in which it wrote:
"In your appeal, copy of which the House of Justice has sent to us,
you said, If the National Spiritual Assembly provides me with
documentation showing that the Universal House of Justice removed my
right to pilgrimage, or if the Universal House of Justice informs me
that this is the case, I will certainly withdraw this appeal and
immediately issue the retraction that the NSA has directed me to
make.' The response of the House of Justice, as conveyed to you by
the letter of its Department of the Secretariat dated December 7,
1995, provided the documentation and the confirmation you requested
that the House of Justice was the source of the decision to suspend
your right to pilgrimage.
"We have waited patiently, but you have not until now fulfilled your
commitment to the House of Justice, as quoted in the preceding
paragraph, which compounds the gravity of your offence. Therefore,
we instruct you to take action within 48 hours from your receipt of
this letter to live up to your undertaking to issue on Talisman 'the
retraction that the NSA has directed me to make.' We shall expect a
clear and unambiguous retraction. Having done so, you should
immediately dispatch a copy of the text of your retraction to our
Assembly. Failure to comply with this instruction in its entirety
will result in the immediate removal of your administrative rights.
"We take no pleasure in giving you such strong direction, but your
actions constitute an inadmissible violation of Baha'i conduct and
must be rectified. We await your response and, in the meantime,
assure you of our prayers that the Blessed Beauty may guide and
assist you."
In response, Mr. Langness posted on March 5 a retraction that is
perfunctory and questionable.
NATIONAL SPIRITUAL ASSEMBLY OF THE
BAHA'IS OF THE UNITED STATES
--------------------------------------------------------
Clearly, David knew from May 18, 1988 that it was the Universal House of
Justice that had suspended his right to pilgrimage, and he was aware of the
reasons for the sanction a number of years before his October 1, 1995 posting
on Talisman. I find his assertions to the contrary disturbing.
Stephen Birkland
From alma@indirect.comTue Mar 19 19:01:37 1996
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:43:11 -0700
From: Alma Engels
To: David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com>, Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Retraction Response (long)
Dear David,
As you know for I wrote you, I was one of those who was very puzzled at the
differences between your original posts and the explanation of the events as
forwarded by the NSA through Counsellor Birkland. I thought at the time
there must be pieces missing. Thus I am s-o glad that you posted today (a
post which arrived just after Jackson's email containing a new prayer for
Naw Ruz --coincidence or more than that?) clarifying the situation. And I
am pleased that you had the patience to wait until you had the chance to
discuss this with Counsellor Birkland. As has been said repeatedly here, we
must heal any rifts between ourselves and the Institutions that guide us.
Now that this is behind you (and us) my hope is that you will once again add
to the volume of Talisman with your posts.
In peace and with much Baha'i love,
Alma
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 mcfarlane@upanet.uleth.caTue Mar 19 19:03:00 1996
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:53:52 -0700
From: Gordon McFarlane
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Philosophers, sages, and mystics
Dear J.W.
Being wholly unfamiliar with Persian and Arabic I can't comment
intelligently on the first part of your march 18th posting but, if you'll
forgive me, I can comment curiously and at the outset I apologize if, at
times, my comments may sound sarcastic, snarky or disrespectful. BTW the
volume of TOB I have is translated by Habib Taherzadeh "with the assistance
of a committee" (It's always annoyed me when people who serve on
feather-in-cap committees are not properly acknowledged - but that's another
issue.) and copyrighted 1978.
You wrote . . .
>The passage on p. 171 "the high endeavors exerted by their rulers and the
>wise and learned among men" renders "az himmat-i awliya wa-hukama-yi
>ard". This translation is wrong: "Hukama," as above, is the usual late
>Persian term for "philosophers," so "wise and learned" is a reasonable
>but too general rendering. "Ard" is "earth" or "world," not "men."
Arguably, it is an acceptable loose rendering but a literal rendering
>would have done equally well. "Awliya," however, means "Sufi
>saints"--not "rulers,"--in this context. (It has a very wide range of
>meanings ranging from "imam" to "executor of a will.") . . . etc.
I'm not quite sure how a translation can be "wrong" and a "reasonable" and
"acceptable loose rendering" at the same time. Are you suggesting that;
"the zeal and energy born of mystical attainments, of their sufi saints,
and philosophers of the earth." is a more literal and equally valid
rendering than "the high endeavors exerted by their rulers and the wise and
learned among men"? For me, the later, albeit wrong and misleading,
rendering has more significance and cultural relevance in the context of
the entire sentence - "Please God, the peoples of the world may be led, as
the result of the high endeavors exerted by their rulers and the wise and
learned amongst men, to recognize their best interests." IMHO if this
phrase had been translated as "Please God, the peoples of the world may be
led, as the result of the high endeavors of daytime television talk show
hosts and sports heroes, to recognize their best interests," ultimately, it
would mean the same thing within the context of North American culture. My
own preference would be "Please God, the peoples of the world may be led, as
the result of the high endeavors of those who carry the most clout in their
respective cultures, to recognize their best interests". I probably
wouldn't be a very good tanslator!

>So what is going on? Well, first, there is obviously a warning about
>depending on translations for word-level interpretation. Second,
>Baha'u'llah is obviously working with categories different from those
>reflected in the English words used in the translation.
I could not agree more. I would add that there is also a warning about
depending on "world-level interpretations" even within ones' own native
language. Isn't "word level interpretation" the same as that bugaboo of all
intellectuals (as well as semi-intellectuals such as I), literalism?
>Baha'u'llah, as he often says elsewhere, thinks that the Shi'ite clergy
>ought to spend less time on the minutiae of law and, something he says
>less often, the Islamic philosophers ought to deal less with obscurities
>of metaphysics. Instead, they ought to work on the practical sciences as
>the European philosophers do.
This is consistent with my reading re. "a philosophy which begins and ends
in words" or the saying attributed to Abdu'l Baha that we "must walk the
mystical path with practical feel" or the other saying attributed to Abdu'l
Baha and loosely paraphrased by the inimitable and ubiquitous Burl Barer as
"Life is an illusion - but you live in it folks!"
>
>As for the passage on p. 162 about "the learned and worldly-wise men of
>this age", this phrase renders `ulama-yi `asr, lit. "the contemporary
>learned (or "the clergy"). The passage would seem to be a criticism of
>the clergy for hindering the ordinary people from becoming Baha'is. (must
we become Baha'is to "inhale the fragrance of fellowship and love" or is the
capacity to "inhale the fragrance . . . " a prerequisite to our recognition
of the Faith.?)
Just as it doesn't ultimately matter by whose "high endeavors" we are led
to recognize our own "best interests", as long as we are led to recognize
them, it doesn't much matter whether it is the clergy, or the learned and
worldy wise men of whatever age, or the day time talk show hosts and sports
heroes who disallow us to to inhale the fragrance of fellowship and love.
On this point, I'm inclined to agree with Sen's response . He wrote
. . .
" I think 'allow' is meant literally - it is not that the aid of the
learned is needed to be able to recognize that God's Will is unity, love and
fellowship, but rather that this is a self-evident truth available to 'any
man', but prone to be obscured by the doings of the learned and
worldly-wise. The role of the learned and worldly-wise here would seem to be
limited to their shutting up for long
enough for the message to be heard."
I wouldn't put it in quite those terms for fear of being accused of
being a member of the C.A.I. (concourse of anti-intellectuals) but I agree
with the drift of it.

>It would seem that Baha'u'llah is condemning the classes of the learned
>as they existed in 19th century Iran--the clergy, who studied Islamic
>law, the philosophers, and the mystics, both of whom were subgroups of
>the clergy.
Aside from the mention of the "learned doctors" indulging in pedanticism,
sophism and circumlocution I don't read this as a condemnation, but rather
as loving admonishion.
>He seems to assume the underlying legitimacy of these groups
>in society, (I agree ) but implicitly compares the clergy, philosophers,
and mystics of Persia unfavorably with those of Europe ( I disagree. I find
the tendency to read "implicit" comparisons into a text somewhat distasteful
and ethnocentric, but I do agree that Baha'u'llah is admonishing the learned
for" (1) occupying themselves totally with useless sciences; (2) hindering
the laymen from accepting the new revelation; and (3) failing to concern
themselves with the real needs of the people and nation.
>The translation, at least in these passages, is defective on several
>grounds: First, it completely obscures the references to mystics.
>Second, it renders important technical terms inconsistently, thus
>obscuring the argument of the underlying Persian. Third, it gives the
>misleading impression that different classes are referred to, when in
>fact a single class is mentioned, or translates words referring to
>different things with the same word.
I really need clarification on this.
1. How are references to mystics obscured? My understanding is that "The
man of consummate learning" (pg 171) = the book learned, intellectual,
scholar and the "sage endowed with penetrating wisdom" = the intuitive,
inspired mystic.
2. Please specify which "technical terms" are inconsistently rendered and
render them consistent.
3. Different classes of "learned"? I do get that impression. Is it
misleading to think that the man of consummate learning and the sage endowed
with penetrating insight are of two different classes. Within a single
class can't there be many sub-classes. This seems to be to be one example
of the danger of "interpreting at the word-level".
With regard to the distinction between the Laity and the Learned you wrote .
. .
>(a) This text would seem to support an elitist view of the issue.
The word elitist carries a tremendous amount of baggage with it and I have
no idea how you intend it. I both agree and disagree. I think "elitist" is
probably an innapropriate word.
I'm pretty much in agreement with the rest of your March 18 post,
particularly your comment that the learned are "judged on whether or not
they put their learning to good use", and for sure, a little knowledge put
to good use is more precious than abundant knowledge wasted.
I'd better quit here or you might have me relegated to the limbo of
forgotten and obsolescent talismanian crackpots.
>Gordon, if you are not confused yet, please let me know, so I can explain
>further. - Please do, whether I'm confused or not.
Appreciatively
Gord.
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comTue Mar 19 19:03:20 1996
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:15:24 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Teaching in Santa Cruz County.
Dear Talismanians
Yesterday Katie Henkle who is David Langness's step daughter and a
student at UCSC was at the Hairdressers well after 2 hours her
hairdresser enrolled in the Faith. The result it seems is a new LSA in
Scotts Valley!!!!!!! wonderful news.
KIndest Regards
Derek Cockshut
PS I can now see all the males groaning: 'now going to the hairdressers
is for teaching'. Of course it is lighten up and fork out the money
From jarmstro@sun1.iusb.eduWed Mar 6 23:56:19 1996
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 17:57:40 -0500 (EST)
From: Jackson Armstrong-Ingram
To: talisman
Subject: Haifa talk 1
SHOGHI EFFENDI said:
The Bahai Revelation has two Manifestations, the BAB and BAHA'U'LLAH.
ABDUL BAHA the Perfect Examplar, the Centre of the Covenant of mankind,
the true interpreter of His Words, a perfect human being. To give Abdul
Baha a station comparable to Baha'u'llah is absolute heresy.
The whole opposition of Mohammed Ali was based upon his insistence that
Abdul Baha claimed to be the divine successor of Baha'u'llah, occupying a
cognate station. Mohammed Ali declared: "Never so long as I live will I
cease to agitate against this imposter who claims that before the
expiration of a full thousand years to occupy the same station as
Baha'u'llah."
The misguided attitude of the firends in attempting to maintain Abdul
Baha in this station was the basis of the whole persecution by the
covenant-breakers. Again and again Abdul Baha wrote disclaiming any
station beyond that of examplar, interpreter and Centre of the Covenant,
but Mohammed Ali said "this was only a blind, that while openly stating
this he was secretly encouraging his followers to manintain and accept
him as the Manifestation." Those who overestimate the station of Abdul
Baha are quite as reprehensible and have done just as much harm as those
who underestimate.
LOROL GASPED:
Do you mean that those that have considered Abdul Baha a Manifestation
are equally as bad as those who have opposed and denied him?
SHOGHI EFFENDI REPLIED:
Yes, that is what I mean, for they continuously furnished the enemy with
proof for false statements. When the Will and Testament was produced,
various believers said Mohammed Ali could no longer deny the full import
of Abdul Baha's meaning, for surely in His last document (Will) left to
voice his directions and desires in perpetuity he could not have failed
to claim this exalted station if all his life this had been his aim and
intent. When shown the Will Mohammed Ali said that this was negligible
compared to the insidious work which had left this impression of Him in
the hearts of the believers.
KEITH:
Shoghi Effendi, what do we do with the Tablet of the Branch in which
Baha'u'llah says of Abdul Baha, "He is Myself, the Shining place of My
identity"?
SHOGHI EFFENDI:
Most certainly Baha'u'llah is not referring to Abdul Baha but I must see
the text.
We: Opening the Scriptures we pointed out the passage. "He is Myself",
with an asterisk and the words, "Abdul Baha".
Keith: It certainly reads that Abdul Baha is the Self of God.
Shoghi Effendi:
This does not refer to Abdul Baha. This means the Voice of God referring
to Baha'u'llah, not Baha'u'llah referring to Abdul Baha. Turning to the
Will and Testament we find the words of Abdul Baha about the two
Manifestations, Bab and Baha'u'llah and the servitude of all else toward
them.
LOROL ASKED:
But how does this statement come to be in the Scriptures?
SHOGHI EFFENDI:
This book was printed without my knowledge. I was not consulted about
it. Sometime after its publication I received a copy which was the first
I had seen it. It is full of errors, many quotations from the writings
of Baha'u'llah have been cut without putting the dotted line to show this
had been done. Had I been consulted I certainly would not have permitted
these errors to have occured.
KEITH:
Then how shall we present the Master? What about the prophecy "The Son
shall come in the glory of the Father, and that no man cometh unto the
Father save through the Son." How can Baha'u'llah represent the second
coming of the Son?
SHOGHI EFFENDI:
The Son, the Christ that was in Jesus has returned in Baha'u'llah in its
fullest station. God is the Father, the essence unmanifest. Man cannot
know Him or comprehend Him. He can be known only through His
Manifestation the Son. Baha'u'llah, that Manifestation of the Son has
come in the full glory of the Father. This idea about Abdul Baha, that
the Son is the Father and the Father the Son, is a reversion to
catholicism. These ideas are pure superstition and could have no basis
in reason. You ridicule the Roman Catholics for their irrational ideas
and would yourselves fall into the same error.
[to be continued]
From jarmstro@sun1.iusb.eduThu Mar 7 18:21:53 1996
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 18:01:37 -0500 (EST)
From: Jackson Armstrong-Ingram
To: talisman
Subject: Haifa talk 2
SHOGHI EFFENDI:
Since Baha'u'llah has made Abdul Baha the infallible interpreter of His
words which then should have the superior weight?
KEITH:
Baha'u'llah, holding the idea that since He was the Manifestation and
Abdul Baha was not, the former would then be superior to the latter.
SHOGHI EFFENDI:
Not at all, the interpreter is the one whos word we must take for He has
the power to tell us just what the speaker means. Therefore, we must
turn to the words of Abdul Baha to determine this question of stations.
In writing to America about the qualifications for voting I quoted from
the Will and Testament and referred to Abdul Baha as the true exemplar.
What did the believers take that to mean? Of course I used the utmost
delicacy for it might do great harm to have this question too suddenly
projected.
KEITH:
But Shoghi Effendi, we would be considered unform [uninformed?] and unfit
to teach in America if we did not make the Covenant of God co-equal with
the Manifestation Baha'u'llah.
SHOGHI EFFENDI:
This is unwarranted. In the light of the Master's continuous denials how
can the believers think this?
KEITH:
Owing to the passage in question in the SCRIPTURES, where it reads that
Abdul Baha is the Self of Baha'u'llah, and for another reason that it is
a universal belief among the teachers. At a New York assembly [she
probably means local community rather than LSA] meeting
Horace Holley said, "In the Will Abdul Baha was presenting Baha'u'llah to
the complete effacement of himself, leaving no testimony and giving no
divine station to himself," which horrified Mrs. Kinney and Archbishop
Barrow.
SHOGHI EFFENDI:
Horace and I are in full accord on this matter. Horace who evidently
holds my view put that foot-note in the scriptures below the TABLET of the
Branch, having taken it bodily from Esselmont's book. (The same evening
Shoghi Effendi sent Ruhi with a copy of the Branch in Persian to show
that this passsage did not occur in the original.)
LYLE:
Are you aware to what extent the American believers teach these ideas and
dogmas? While we are on this subject may we have another question made
clear to us, that has to do with your station?
KEITH INTERRUPTED:
We are told in the Will and Testament that your shade is the shade that
shadoweth all mankind, and that to dispute with you is to dispute with
God etc. Surely after reading these words we cannot consider you just an
ordinary human being.
SHOGHI EFFENDI:
But I am. I am a human being like you or anybody else and I have no
divine station. I am under the protection of Baha'u'llah. The master
promised to protect me from error, likewise the House of Justice. No one
is justified in lokking upon me as other than human.
KEITH:
According to the Will and Testament your decisions are binding and your
words are binding.
SHOGHI EFFENDI:
Only to a certain extent. How far does my independence extend with the
House of Justice, and what is my relation to it?
KEITH:
You are its chairman and interpreter of the Book of laws, the Akdas.
SHOGI EFFENDI:
Yes, but as chairman I have only one vote as has any other member. If my
vote happens to be with the minority I must cheerfully follow the will of
the majority though it be contrary to my wish and conviction.
Keith:
Your word is infallible when it comes to interpreting the text.

SHOGHI EFFENDI:
Yes, the GUARDIAN alone can determine whether any piece of
legislature [sic] can be undertaken or whether the condition is covered
in the holy text. It si promised that the Guardian is protected by God
from making mistakes in these decisions. But apart from that I am like
anyone else.
KEITH:
I have been teaching that it is wrong to think of you as a human being.
I have been teaching that you know the end from the beginning and have a
spiritual status that endows you with superhuman knowledge.
S.E.
This is entirely wrong. I am a human being endowed with the unfailing
protection of Baha'u'llah. To claim for me a station different from
that of humanity or to consider me endowed with superhuman powers is
quite unjustified. For example I have no idea what is going on in
America at present. I must depend upon information for such knowledge.
Keith:
The Master tells us your utterance[s] are infallible.
S.E.
Under certain explicit conditions. In many instances I give human
opinions and suggestions.
Keith:
Undoubtedly you speak with unchallengable authority and we must consider
your words authoritative and infallible.
S.E. (Smiling)
I leave that to your own judgement.
Keith:
If I mentioned this conversation to any of the friends who like me have
looked upon you as divinely endowed they would at once say "How utterly
lacking in spirituality she is, that Shoghi Effendi completely conceals
his station from her. If she was spiritually awake he would without
doubt reveal his true divinity to her. Abdul Baha used to say the same
thing to the believers. They had themselves to know his station before he
confided it to them, so likewise the Guardian is testing you with his
denials."
S.E. (positively amazed)
Do the believers believe Abdul Baha would deliberately disavow himself
and mislead them? When I make these statements categorically I mean
them. You must utterly disregard such casuistry on the part of the
believers. (Again and again throughout the long interview he said how
dangerous it would be to precipitate this discussion or release this
knowledge of the stations of the Covenant and the Guardian among the
believers considering their present conception. Several times Shoghi
Effendi said we must use the utmost delicacy; we must make this known
very gradually; we must not publicly announce this. Similar warnings
were continuously repeated.)
Shoghi Effendi:
If the House of Justice should decide that the shrine of Baha'u'llah
would be removed to the top of Mount Carmel the remains of Abdul Baha
must be removed from the shrine of the Bab. Abdul Baha himself would
feel that it was very unfitting that he should share the shrine with a
Manifestation of God. Abdul Baha's original plan was the building of
nine rooms with the Bab in the center. The three new rooms for the
archives completes Abdul Baha's wish for the shrine of the Bab. Abdul
Baha was placed in the Bab's shrine by the decision of the holy household
before my return from England. Undoubtedly Abdul Baha will be removed
to another resting-place. [Note: the set of designs for the world
center made under Shoghi Effendi's direction in the 1920s includes a
shrine for 'Abdu'l-Baha on the shore between Haifa and Akka as
well as a shrine for the Bab on Carmel and one for Baha'u'llah at Bahji.]
(Here Shoghi Effendi described the
nine terraces that would lead from the foot of Mt. Carmel to the shrine
of the Bab and the nine that would lead to the top whether Baha'u'llah
was placed there or not.)
Keith:
In the light of what you have said Abdul Baha I presume would be placed
at the bottom.
Shoghi Effendi:
Undoubtedly that would be his wish.
Lyle:
It has always been impossible for me to believe that Abdul Baha's station
was equal to the station of Baha'u'llah the Supreme Manifestion and Abdul
Baha the teacher.
Shoghi Effendi:
Now you are going to the opposite extreme. Yesterday there was
over-stating, now you are under-stating. Abdul Baha is not a teacher, an
apostle or a chosen one, for there might be others. Abdul Baha is quite
apart and different from anyone who has ever appeared on earth before. A
perfect human being! Can you conceive a perfect human being? The phrase
that best expresses Abdul Baha is the true exemplar, the Center of the
Covenant. It is just as grave a mistake to over-estimate Abdul Baha as
to under-estimate him. Abdul Baha never claimed to be a Manifestation,
all his life he suffered from this assumption. But we must never go to
the other extreme and confuse anybody else with Him or His station.
Keith:
Is that why Baha'u'llah calls him the greatest mystery of God?
S.E.
Just so. His station is a mystery.
Lorol:
Then if he is just a human being can we evolve to the same station in time?
S.E.
No, no one can attain to the station of A. B.
Lorol:
But surely humanity will sometime reach perfection.
S.E.
No. A.B. says that humanity will evolve and develop infinitely. To
reach perfection means that advancement stops, there is nothing further
to be obtained, mankind will ever continue his development towards
perfection but no one will ever attain to or occupy the station of A.B.
If you are asked to explain this you must say that this is a mystery. A
mystery is not irrational, it does not run counter to reason, it
transcends reason.
Keith:
You mean just as science sees a mystery in the great primal energy
becoming ninety-two chemical elements?

S.E.
No, the mystery of nature may later become manifest, a spiritual mystery
can never be grasped by the human mind.
Keith:
Then I have been teaching wrong all these years.
S.E.
It astonishes me that these ideas are so prevalent in America.
Keith:
When Elizabeth Greenleaf and I were here six years ago why was this not
explained to us?
S.E.
The subject was not broached and I did not realize that these were your
conclusions. You must not worry for having taught this way, it will
right itself. As new believers come into the Faith this idea will be
forgotten. Nothing can be done about the past. The past is over.
Devote yourself to giving the right conception to those you teach from
now on. It would do incalculable harm to try to rectify this impression now.

Lyle:
The old believers would put any one out of the cause who dared to spread
this teaching.
S.E.
Undoubtedly, but our eyes must be turned towards the throngs that will
come into the Faith in future, not toward the present believers. We must
endeavour the new generation of believers not the present one. If the
friends are not clear on this question ask them to write me. I have so
far approached this question with the utmost delicacy, as in the
qualifications for voters. No one has ever questioned me about this. If
they had I should have been constrained to answer fearlessly and fully.
If the friends write me I will give them the same answer I am giving
you.
[to be continued]
From jarmstro@sun1.iusb.eduSat Mar 23 12:46:16 1996
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 17:29:59 -0500 (EST)
From: Jackson Armstrong-Ingram
To: talisman
Subject: Haifa talk 3
Keith:
Reverting to yesterday's discussion I want to get this matter clear. If
you are a human being just as muddled, veiled confused and groping as I
am why is it that according to the Will and Testament we must obey you?
Why is it when I receive a cable from you to come to Haifa would I rather
throw myself into the bay than refuse? Why did I not explain this and
then go down to Poona and conduct my class?
S.E.
In your human affairs I make suggestions and recommendations. When I
interpret the Words I am guided by Baha'u'llah.
Keith:
Why does Abdul Baha call down the fierce indignation of God upon those
who disobey you?
S.E.
This is only when I insist or command, then my interpretation is
infallible. The believers must distinguish between what I recommend or
definitely state.
Keith:
Can you imagine the friends refusing to follow your recommendation?
S.E.
They must discriminate.
(We then brought up the question of praying to Abdul Baha.)
WE:
Many believers pray to the Master. Is this proper?
S.E.
Baha'u'llah is the source we must pray to naturally.
Keith (insisting):
Is it wrong to pray to Abdul Baha?
S.E.
No, it is not wrong to pray to Abdul Baha in an intercessory capacity.
Keith:
Like the Roman catholics pray to the Virgin Mary?
S.E.
Yes.
Keith:
Then it is not actually wrong to pray to Abdul Baha?
Lorol:
No, if you want to be foolish enough to do so.
Keith:
Is that true Shoghi Effendi?
Shoghi Effendi:
That is much too strong. It would not be foolish to pray to the Master
but the next generation will have forgotten to do it. It is only those
who knew and reverenced Abdul Baha who will hold to this practice, but it
will later be discarded.
Lorol:
There are those who pray to you, Shoghi Effendi.
S.E.
This is absolutely heretical. Such things are not permissible. It is
wrong to address me as Lord or Master, or Thee or Thine. I had to send a
very abrupt cable to the friends in Bombay to prevent them from
celebrating my birthday. If this starts now there will be no end to it.
The first Guardian's birthday, the first Guardian's death, the tenth
Guardian's accession. They would have 400 Guardian's celebrations in 365
days. Nor must they refer to me as His Holiness. These things have no
place in our Faith, they savour of popishness.
KEITH:
There is a picture of you in the Bahai hall at Karachi labelled "His
Holiness, Shoghi Effendi".
Shoghi Effendi (emphatically):
Then they must take it down.
Keith:
Oh my, I should not have mentioned this!
Lorol:
Why not if it is wrong?
Shoghi Effendi:
I have requested, suggested, but now the time has come when I must insist
in no unmistakable terms that these things must cease. For instance,
this is what we have been speaking about when you say I am infallible,
that is when I insist. In this I am infallible.
Lorol:
When did Baha'u'llah declare Himself?
Shoghi E.
He declared Himself three times, first as the Bab predicted in certain
odes written in 1852-53, where the Bab makes veiled references to
Baha'u'llah's station as the Supreme Manifestation. You will remember in
"The Son of the Wolf" how Baha'u'llah speaks of His first intimation that
he is the Promised One. It was as if fire ran through His veins and He
was consumed with a power that overmastered Him. the second declaration
was to a few friends when He was leaving Baghdad, according to the Bab's
second date, in 1863. Then in Adrianople between 1864 and 1868 He
proclaimed it to the world in His epistles to the Kings. In "Some
Answered Questions" we learn that the Manifestation was chosen from birth
but was not conscious of it till the time His Mission approached. Many
fought against it at first. But all Manifestations went thru this long
struggle of preparation, such as Moses in the Burning Bush, Jesus in the
wilderness, Buddha under the Bod tree, and Baha'u'llah in the mountains
of suliy [sic] who spent a longer time than others because His
preparation was greatest. Baha'u'llah spent two years in the mountains
alone. He also went to leave Subi-azel free to try to establish his
cause. I assign preparation for His ministry as one of the reasons for
His self-imposed exile. The greatness of Baha'u'llah's Manifestation is
shown by His having a Manifestation for the forerunner, but He is greater
than the Bab for He came for the whole world. We must never give out the
impression that one Manifestation of God was greater in power or wisdom
than another. They are only greater in what they manifest.
[to be continued]
From jarmstro@sun1.iusb.eduSat Mar 23 12:46:24 1996
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 17:57:05 -0500 (EST)
From: Jackson Armstrong-Ingram
To: talisman
Subject: Haifa talk 4
(We constantly used the words Cause and Movement and S.E. asked us to try
and eliminate these words as they did not convey the deep significance
of the Bahai Faith or World Order of Baha'u'llah, and advised us to teach
new believers to use these two expressions and never to permit anyone to
use the name "Bahaism.")
S.E.
We can trace the evolution of the Bahai Faith by the terms adopted, then
changed. First organisation was adopted, then Administration, now it
will take on "The World Order of Baha'u'llah["].
WE:
In many places the believers use healing prayers continuously in regular
meetings. Many object to this practice.
S.E.
No one in any assembly [community or meeting] should insist upon saying
healing prayers, but we must acquiesce if some one should want one. When
we have general rules, we become dogmatic and inflexible. But friends
who do not care to sit through long prayers regularly may go or stay as
they wish. This does not determine anyone's spirituality, but there must
be no criticism or controversy on the matter. Great patience is
required to unite the differing elements in our Faith. Time is the best
healer. These differences of opinion will disappear with time. We might
remember the words of Saint Augustine, in esentials unity, in
non-essentials diversity, in all things charity.
S.E.
The attack that was recently published by the Soviet government has done
more to spread the teachings of the Bahai Faith than years of teaching to
disseminate. Regarding the League of nations: The principle underlying
the League of Nations will break but the institution will develop.
Whether this League or another. This change will be brought about by the
coming war which is inevitable. The greatest benefit of the last was the
bringing about of the League. Unlike the last war, the coming war will
end war. The problems brought about by the last war have been beneficial
to humanity as they are bringing nearer the disintegration of those
institutions contrary to the World Order of Baha'u'llah. Since Bahais
cannot purify politics you must keep out of them for they are based upon
fraud, rivalry, and secrecy, which is against our principles. Their
practices are foolish, childish and mischievous. Bahais cannot vote in
political parties. They are against our principles. Believers may hold
administrative but not political posts.
Lyle:
What do we do when we are compelled to vote as honorable citizens? It is
demanded of every American citizen to vote and serve the country in time
of war. How can we obey the laws of the Unites States and not vote or
fight in case of war?
S.E.
The Quakers had this same non-political policy. You must ask for
exemption as conscientious objectors. If a penalty is incurred such as
prison or fine, then you must obey, but you must offer to serve in any
capacity than actually killing your fellow-men. Apply to your government
for exemption from service in case of war.
S.E.
Baha'is must make every effort to have America enter the League of
Nations, but with the rightful purpose. America must uphold the League
to exercise sovereign power. We must conform to the requirements of our
government to the extent that the assemblies in Russia, when they were
told they must give secret information, to close the schools, stop
printing Bahai literature, cease foreign correspondence. This was not
disloyalty to the Bahai faith, it was only a temporary dislocation and
interruption. But if the believers are requested to recant or give up
their Faith, this would be absolute disloyalty to the Faith, and they
would rather be martyred.
[to be continued]
From jarmstro@sun1.iusb.eduSat Mar 23 12:46:32 1996
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 17:14:02 -0500 (EST)
From: Jackson Armstrong-Ingram
To: talisman
Subject: Haifa talk 5
S.E.
Today the Americans are leading the Bahai world. The East has enthusiasm
and devotion but no training. Unless the East takes on courage,
directness and straightforwardness, which is what the West can teach the
East, the center may shift from the East to the West.
Lorol:
Just how is America leading the Bahai world?
S.E.
America is the first country to formulate the declaration of trust and
obtain legal recognition, which is a model for all the national spiritual
assemblies in the future to follow. Even some of your local assemblies,
like New York and Chicago, have been incorporated. It was an excellent
thing for Horace Holley to have suggested copywriting [sic; obviously
copyrighting is meant; the idea that there could be an exclusive right to
use the name Baha'i in the USA was overturned in court action in the late
1930s] the name Bahai.
Keith:
Under the declaration of trust the Bahais now have legal status. We can
appeal to the government and receive their protection, can we not?
S.E.
Certainly this gives Bahais recognized legal status.
Keith:
This legal status will also protect us against those who wish to proceed
against the Bahai Faith. Meaning that if anyone tried to set up another
Assembly in the same city the Bahais would be protected by law against
opposing persons.
S.E. [this is presumably addressed to Keith who was going there]:
While in Persia endeavour to impress upon the Persian believers the
non-political character of the Bahai Faith.
Prominent Persians wish to occupy high political positions. The
administrative offices which we may occupy are secondary, while the
Persian craves position, power, prestige, glory. They must discipline
themselves and restrain these ambitions. You must not be afraid to speak
clearly on this subject. Courage, directness, and straight-forwardness
is what the West must teach the East. While very tactful present these
subjects with clearness, firmness and frankness. Do not mention this
directly but intimate that unless the Orient can take on these
characteristics the center may shift from the East to the West.
Lorol:
There is a general belief that you can prophesy, that you did definitely
assure Mrs. Mathews or her immediate family by cable that she would
recover. This at a time when all hope had been abandoned by the finest
specialists in America.
S.E.
I have no knowledge of making any definite statement for Mrs. Mathews
recovery. I assured them of my prayers and faith. I do not think I sent
such a cable, but if they can produce it then I must have been guided.
But I do not believe such a positive assurance can be produced.
Lorol:
For many reasons I have lost interest and enthusiasm in teaching and do
not feel qualified to attempt again to offer myself as a teacher. Will
you kindly pray for me that I may be able to overcome the antagonism I
feel toward certain so-called Bahais. I feel that I cannot teach now.
S.E.
You must not allow yourself to be touched by this chatter of idle minds.
You must go ahead and teach. I am deeply grateful for the unique manner
in which you have served the Faith of Baha'u'llah and will pray and
supplicate that divine bounty will reassure you and lift these burdens
from your heart. I shall never forget the services you have rendered the
Faith and am deeply appreciative.
Lyle:
Have you any suggestions to offer regarding the future operation of Nine
Gables? For instance would you advise specializing in anything or
experimenting with two or three lines such as orcharding, vegetable
growing or perhaps adding sheep or other cattle?
S.E.
I should advise more than one enterprise. Have you any pictures of Nine
Gables? I would like very much if you took some films of N.G. and sent
me some copies, also of Mount Salvat.
[The End]
From jarmstro@sun1.iusb.eduSat Mar 23 12:46:41 1996
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 17:24:23 -0500 (EST)
From: Jackson Armstrong-Ingram
To: talisman
Subject: Haifa talk note
I just posted the last part of Haifa talk. I hope it has been found
interesting and useful and that next time you read Dispensation you have
a fuller picture of the context Shoghi Effendi was addressing.
Jackson
From sadra@rt66.comTue Feb 13 23:35:46 1996
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 11:39:02 -0700 (MST)
From: Sadra
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: frlw@midway.uchicago.edu, Masumian@mail.utexas.edu,
Noorbakhsh.Monzavi@hibo.no
Subject: Reuters 2/12/96 (fwd)
>
> Bahai gets death sentence in Iran -French report
> PARIS, Feb 11 - An Islamic revolutionary court in Iran has
>sentenced to death a 49-year-old Bahai for apostasy, returning to his original
>faith after converting to Islam, the French branch of the Bahai faith said on
>Sunday.
> Dhabihu'llah Mahrami, an Agriculture Department employee in Yazd province,
>will also have all his possessions confiscated according to the court's ruling
>handed down in the past few days, a Bahai spokeswoman said.
> Mahrami, born a Bahai, was accused of converting to Islam in 1981 to avoid
>being fired from his government job but returned to the Bahai faith seven years
>later, according to translations of court documents provided by the French
>Bahais.
> ``The Bahais of France fear that this verdict marks a resumption of open
>persecution against our co-religionists in Iran.
> ``Thanks to the pressures of international opinion, executions had
>stopped...but there were still more subtle persecutions aimed at strangling
>them economically and repressing them socially,'' she said.
> The Bahai faith, an off-shoot of Islam, was created in Iran 150 years ago.
>It says it has six million members worldwide including 350,000 in Iran where,
>according to the court documents released in Paris, it is officially considered
>``a misleading and wayward sect.''
> The last execution of a Bahai in Iran was in 1992 when Bahman Samandari, a
>leading community member, was executed.
> REUTER
>
>=END=
>
>=START= XMT: 06:49 Sun Feb 11 EXP: 6 :00 Wed Feb 14
>
>
>START= XMT: 06:24 Sun Feb 18 EXP: 6 :00 Wed Feb 21
>
Sunday, February 11, 1996
Baha'i gets death sentence in Iran - French report
PARIS, Feb 11 - An Islamic revolutionary court in Iran has
sentenced to death a 49-year-old Baha'i for apostasy, returning to his
original faith after converting to Islam, the French branch of the Baha'i
Faith said on Sunday.
Dhabihu'llah Mahrami, an Agriculture Department employee in Yazd province,
will also have all his possessions confiscated according to the court's
ruling handed down in the past few days, a Baha'i spokeswoman said.
Mahrami, born a Baha'i, was accused of converting to Islam in 1981 to avoid
being fired from his government job but returned to the Baha'i faith seven
years later, according to translations of court documents provided by the
French Baha'is. "The Baha'is of France fear that this verdict marks a
resumption of open persecution against our co-religionists in Iran.
"Thanks to the pressures of international opinion, executions had
stopped... but there were still more subtle persecutions aimed at strangling
them economically and repressing them socially," she said.
The Baha'i Faith, an off-shoot of Islam, was created in Iran 150 years
ago. It says it has six million members worldwide including 350,000 in Iran
where, according to the court documents released in Paris, it is officially
considered "a misleading and wayward sect."
The last execution of a Baha'i in Iran was in 1992 when Bahman Samandari, a
leading community member, was executed.
From osborndo@pilot.msu.eduWed Feb 21 11:07:31 1996
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 11:57:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Zhang Osborn
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: More on Baha'i in Yazd Under Death Sentence
Allah'u'Abha! Here's more on the recent death sentence given to a Baha'i
in Yazd, Iran (received from a friend). DZO
>WASHINGTON, Feb. 15 / -- The Spokesman for the U.S. Department of
>State today condemned Iran's action in sentencing an Iranian Baha'i to death
>for apostasy.
>
>Representatives of the American Baha'i community welcomed U.S. Government
>support for the Iranian Baha'is and urged other governments and the United
>Nations to join in protesting the death sentence.
>
>Following are the official State Department statement and an explanation of
>the case released by the U.S. Baha'i group, which represents 120,000 American
>Baha'is. There are more than 300,000 Baha'is in Iran, by far the largest
>religious minority group in that country.
>
>Official statement from the U.S. Department of State spokesman Nicholas
>Burns, Feb. 15, 1996:
>
>"We have learned that a court of the Government of Iran has sentenced a
>member of the Baha'i faith, Mr. Zabihullah Mahrami, to death for apostasy.
>
>"The United States Government strongly condemns the conviction and the
>sentence and calls upon the Iranian Government to repudiate them, to release
>Mr. Mahrami, and to take all steps necessary to ensure his safety.
>
>"The United States further calls on the Government of Iran to cease its
>persecution of the Baha'i and other religious minorities and to comply with
>the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights."
>
>The National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States issued
>the following explanation of the case:
>
>* Yazd Court Sentences Baha'i: Mr. Zabihullah Mahrami, a 49-year-old Baha'i,
>was convicted of apostasy and sentenced to death by the Islamic Revolutionary
>Courts of the Province of Yazd (January 2, 1996). The sentence has been
>appealed to Iran's Supreme Court. The timing of the Supreme Court
>consideration is not known.
>
>* Verdict finds apostasy based upon rejection of Islam: The court maintains
>that Mr. Mahrami, who was born into a Baha'i family, became a Moslem in 1981
>and that after seven years, he returned to the Baha'i Faith. He was arrested
>on September 6, 1995 on charges of apostasy. The verdict states that on three
>occasions (October-December, 1995), Mr. Mahrami reaffirmed his Baha'i beliefs
>and refused to repent his alleged apostasy, although he would be spared the
>death sentence if he embraced Islam.
>
>The court found Mr. Mahrami guilty of "denouncing the blessed religion of
>Islam and accepting the beliefs of the wayward Baha'i sect (national
>apostasy)."
>
>* Threat to Christians and other converts from Islam: Iran officially
>recognizes Judaism, Christianity and Zoroastrianism as religions whose
>members are afforded legal protection. If this verdict is upheld, however,
>an adherent of one of these religions who had converted from Islam could be
>prosecuted and would face the death penalty for apostasy. (Note: Iran does
> not recognize the Baha'i Faith as a legitimate religion, and all Iranian
>Baha'is are regarded as "unprotected infidels." In defining apostasy,
>however, Iranian clerics distinguish between Baha'is born into a Baha'i
>family and those who converted from Islam to the Baha'i Faith.)
>
>* Action violates international law: The Yazd court verdict violates the
>International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, of which Iran is
>signatory. The Covenant specifically provides for an individual's right to
>have a religion, not to have a religion, or to change his religion.
>
>* Baha'is urge protest against Iranian action: Baha'is in the U.S. and other
>countries urge government action and public protest to persuade Iran to set
>aside this verdict and to permit free choice of religion, according to
>international law.
>
>* Three other Baha'is under death sentence: Two Baha'is condemned to death
>in 1992 for membership in the Baha'i Faith are still in prison in Karaj and
>have appealed to the Supreme Court. The third was released from prison in
>late 1993 but still faces charges of apostasy and could be rearrested.
>
>CO: National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States
>
>ST: District of Columbia
>
--
>
>
>
From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comFri Mar 1 15:25:25 1996
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 96 12:27:01 -0500
From: Ahang Rabbani
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Death Sentence for Apostasy
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
The following was shared with Adabiyat list by Albrecht Hofheinz
and may be of interest to some. ahang.
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 00:09:37 +0100
Sender: UCSB Religious Studies Forum
From: Wendi and Moojan Momen
Subject: Death Sentence for Apostasy
The following document is a translation of a death sentence recently handed
down by a court in the city of Yazd against a member of the Baha'i Faith,
for no other reason than that he is a member of the Baha'i Faith.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROVISIONAL TRANSLATION FROM PERSIAN
[Emblem of the Islamic republic of Iran]
Minutes of the interrogation
Page number:
Meeting number:
Islamic Revolutionary Courts of the Province of Yazd
Court classification number: 74/2288/D
Appeal number: 74/2312/D-R
Date of investigation: 12 Day 1374 [2 January 1996]
Investigating authority: Branch number 1 of the Islamic Revolutionary Court
of Yazd
The particulars of the accused: Dhabihu'llah Mahrami, son of Ghulamrida,
born in 1325 [1946], a resident of Yazd
The nature of the accusations: Denouncing the religion of Islam and
adopting the beliefs of the wayward Baha'i sect; national apostasy
Procedure:
Mr. Dhabihu'llah Mahrami, son of Ghulamrida, born into a Baha'i family,
followed the wayward Baha'i sect until the year 1360 [1981], at which time,
while he was an employee of the Department of Agriculture of the Province
of Yazd, he recanted [his faith in] Baha'ism in a widely distributed
newspaper and announced his acceptance of the true religion of Islam.
Furthermore, he indicated his religion to be Muslim, of the Shi ih sect, on
the form which he completed at the Department of Agriculture in 1364, on
the basis of which he was not fired from his job in the government.
However, he recently announced himself to be a Baha'i and indicated that he
participates in the gatherings of this sect. He has also wedded his
daughter to a Baha'i individual in Isfahan (as reported by the Department
of Intelligence in Yazd in its documents of 11 Khurdad 1374 [1 June 1995]
numbers 2696/m/33-23/7/70 and 21364/M/33). On 2 Murdad 1374 [24 July 1995]
an instruction was issued by the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Court in
Yazd to the Department of Intelligence to take the aforementioned
individual to the aforesaid Court during working hours.
On 25 Murdad 1374 [16 August 1995] he appeared before the Islamic
Revolutionary Court in Yazd and attested to his being born into a Baha'i
family and to his attending the [Nineteen Day] Feasts; furthermore, while
expressing his doubts about the contents of the paper bearing his signature
and the matter of the form of the Department of Agriculture of the Province
of Yazd indicating that he is a follower of the Shi ih sect of Islam, he
declared that the signature at the bottom of the form does belong to him
but that he is unaware of the contents of the form.
When asked from whom he receives his instructions, he said, from higher
authorities of the Spiritual Assembly, the members of which he does not
know, as he receives his instructions through liaisons. In the preliminary
stages of the investigation carried out by the Department of Intelligence
of the Province, while conveying his remorse for converting to Islam (when
he was a Baha'i), he stated that he had forwarded his request to the Baha'i
institutions for pardon and for returning to the Baha'i community, and that
he has been forgiven and is now recognized as a Baha'i by the Baha'i
community (pages 33 and 35 of his file). He does however confess that in
the past seven years he did attend mass prayers every once in a while and
was truly a Muslim, even though he felt ashamed in front of his wife and
children (pages 40 and 41 of his file). In several instances, he denies
that he announced his aversion from the wayward Baha'i sect by choice; he
even states that "because prominent Baha'is were arrested and killed at the
beginning of the revolution, my intention was to keep my family and myself
safe; however, when it was determined that the Baha'is were no longer being
bothered, I became a Baha'i again" (pages 40 and 41 of his file).
Because of the negative effects of his accepting the wayward Baha'i sect
after being a Muslim for seven years, and based on religious axioms, the
Revolutionary Court in Yazd (branch number 1) endeavoured to hold certain
meetings for the purpose of guiding him [to the path of truth] and
encouraging him to repent for having committed the most grievous sin, i.e.,
apostasy. The first meeting was held on 11 Mihr 1374 [3 October 1995],
during which he clearly announced himself to be a Baha'i and a follower of
the principles of this sect. Despite his limited knowledge of the blessed
religion of Islam and of the misleading and wayward Baha'i sect, he did not
accept the suggestion of this court to receive guidance from well-informed
individuals. In response to the question of the court about what he
believes the station of Mirza Muhammad Aliy-i-Bab to be, he responded that
the Bab was the Herald of the Manifestation of Mirza Husayn- Aliy-i-Baha',
Who was also a Prophet sent by God.
After he was told that according to the belief of all the sects of Islam,
His Holiness Muhammad was the Seal of the Prophets, that [the acceptance]
of this fact is one of the essential religious beliefs of the Muslims, and
that anyone denying this fact will be removed from the Cause [of Islam], he
stated, "I do not believe so", even though he had confessed to be of sound
mind, had taken full responsibility for his statements and had indicated
that he continued to believe in all that he has said. According to a letter
numbered 4564/M/213 dated 11 Mihr 1374 [3 October 1975] from the Department
of Intelligence of the Province of Yazd, the father of this individual was
born into a Muslim family, became a Baha'i when he got married, and
remained a Baha'i until the end of his life and was buried in the Baha'i
cemetery of Yazd; his mother was a Baha'i born into a Baha'i family.
A second meeting was held on 22 Mihr 1374 [14 October 1995] in the Islamic
Revolutionary Court of Yazd for the purpose of guiding him. When he was
asked whether he had reached a decision in the time awarded to him, he
stated that he remains firm in his faith in Baha'ism, that he was indeed a
Muslim for seven years, and that he became a Baha'i once again in light of
the fact that the members of his family are Baha'is. When asked if he would
become a Muslim if the members of his family were to become Muslims, he
responded in the negative, indicating that he would remain a Baha'i. Again,
he stated that he accepts Mirza Husayn-Aliy-i-Baha' as the Prophet of God,
that he believes in Him, that he makes these statements with a sound mind
and on his own accord, and that he is not willing to return to Islam or to
repent for this act of apostasy.
The third meeting was held on 28 Aban 1374 [19 December 1995], in which he
repeated his previous statements and, attesting to being of sound mind and
in full control, indicated that he does not intend to return to Islam or to
repent for having committed the most grievous sin, i.e., apostasy. After
holding three consecutive meetings for guiding him [to the truth], despite
the fact that he was given ample time to study the situation and to accept
the suggestion [of this court] to be sent to a learned individual for
investigating the shallow foundations of his beliefs, he refused to do so,
and, regardless of the tremendous efforts [of this court] towards
encouraging him to repent for having committed the most grievous sin, i.e.,
apostasy, [the court] did not succeed [in its efforts] because of the
enmity and the stubbornness of this individual. Therefore, in light of
section 10 of the second volume of Mirath (p. 336), written by his holiness
Imam Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and section 1
of the second volume (p.494) of Al-Hudud, he was asked to select a defence
attorney to defend him against these accusations.
After introducing an attorney at law [as his defence lawyer], a session of
this branch [of the Revolutionary Court] was held on 12 Day 1374 [2 January
1996] with his attorney also present. Having heard his own and his lawyer's
defence statements, which were presented both verbally and through a
written statement, he was given one last chance to defend himself. The end
of the investigation was then announced and the following verdict issued.
The Court's verdict:
Concerning the charges brought against Mr. Dhabihu'llah Mahrami, the son of
Ghulamrida, i.e., denouncing the blessed religion of Islam and accepting
the beliefs of the wayward Baha'i sect (national apostasy), in light of his
clear confessions to the facts that he accepted the wayward Baha'i sect at
the age of maturity, later accepted Islam for a period of seven years, and
then returned to the aforementioned sect; and because of the fact that,
despite the tremendous efforts of this court to guide him and to encourage
him to repent for having committed the most grievous sin, he remains firm
in his baseless beliefs, he has, in three consecutive meetings, while being
of sound body and mind and in absolute control, announced his allegiance to
the principles of Baha'ism and his belief in the prophethood of Mirza
Husayn-Aiy-i-Baha, he has openly denied the most essential [principle] of
Islam (Prophet Muhammad being the Seal of the Prophets), and he is not
willing to repent for having committed this sin, the following verdict was
issued based on the investigations of the Department of Intelligence of the
Province of Yazd, and the damaging consequences of his leaving the true
religion of Islam and rejoining the Baha'i sect, which, according to
indisputable principles accepted by reasonable people, is a clear insult to
the beliefs of over one billion Muslims.
By applying the tenth definition of "Nijasat" [impurities], to be found in
the first volume of Tahrir-Al Vasilih (p. 118), in defining an infidel and
an apostate, as well as section ten of the book of Al-Mavarith (on the
topic of inheritance) and sections one and four of Al-hudud (on the topic
of apostasy) written by the great founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran,
his holiness Imam Khomeini, the accused is sentenced to death because of
being an apostate. Furthermore, based on section one of Almavarith (on the
topic of inheritance), and in light of the fact that he does not have any
Muslim heirs, a verdict is issued for the confiscation of all of his
properties and assets by the Yazd division of the Imam's Executive Body.
This verdict was issued in the presence [of the accused], and can,
according to paragraph 19 of the law of Public and Revolutionary Courts, be
reconsidered in the Supreme Court.
Fallah
Head of branch number 1 of the Islamic Revolutionary Court in Yazd.
<< end of forwarded material >>
>REPOST FROM DECEMBER ON USE OF "LAY"
> >From owner-talisman@indiana.edu Sat Mar 23 12:23:25 1996
> Received: from tempest.rs.itd.umich.edu (tempest.rs.itd.umich.edu [141.211.63.93]) by roatan.ucs.indiana.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3/1.10IUPO) with ESMTP id MAA09138 for ; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 12:23:24 -0500 (EST)
> Received: from tempest.rs.itd.umich.edu by tempest.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.1/2.2)
> id MAA06213; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 12:23:14 -0500 (EST)
> Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 12:23:12 -0500 (EST)
> From: Juan R Cole
> X-Sender: jrcole@tempest.rs.itd.umich.edu
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: the "lay"/"experts" archive
> Message-ID:
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
>
>
> Friends:
>
>
> We recently had a message posted from the Universal House of
> Justice saying it was not appropriate to make a distinction between "lay"
> and other Baha'is. Had I been asked this question in this context, I
> would have given the same reply. However, it seemed to me that the
> issues in our original discussion were different, and I managed easily to
> find the right file in my archives, so I though it worthwhile posting the
> earlier, relevant messages so that we can weigh to what extent the
> original issues are actually dealt with in the recent message.
>
>
> cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan
>
>
>
> >From jrcole@umich.eduMon Dec 18 12:49:53 1995
> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 12:42:09 -0500 (EST)
> From: Juan R Cole
> To: Jonah Winters
> Cc: Member1700@aol.com, talisman
> Subject: Re: Review / Provisional Translations
>
>
>
> Those lay Baha'is who are so eager to tell professional Baha'i historians
> and philosophers how they should do things would be well advised to
> listen
> to us when we say that their suggestions are impractical and have a
> deleterious effect upon Baha'i scholarship (and thence upon a number of
> other important areas--publication of journal articles, incorporation of
> accurate accounts into reference works, public knowledge of the Faith,
> and teaching persons of capacity).
>
>
> cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
>
>
> >From mfoster@tyrell.netMon Dec 18 23:04:57 1995
> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 18:03:17 -0600 (CST)
> From: "Mark A. Foster"
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: Lay Baha`is?
>
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
>
> Talismanians -
>
> A posting today which referred to *"lay Baha'is"* and criticized such
> individuals for interfering with certain expressions of academic Baha'i
> scholarship disturbed me greatly. As an academic who has done some
> research related to the Faith, I have no desire to be considered a
> *professional Baha'i*, whatever that might be, and, personally, would
> never choose to refer to any of my fellow believers as *"lay Baha'is."*
>
> A concern I and others have periodically had is that there may be an
> attempt to bring about a certain type of Baha'i intellectual hegemony.
> Postings like the one we saw today renewed this concern in my mind.
>
> In the Baha'i community, there are *no professional Baha'is*, in the
> sense of a career clergy who are authorized to act as interpreters or
> expounders of the text to other believers, and, thus, there can be *no*
> *"lay Baha'is."*
>
> Regards to all,
>
> Mark
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * *
> *Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion
> (Structuralist) *
> *President (1995), Kansas Sociological
> Society *
> *Academic Director (and Kansas Dir.), Foundation for the Science of
> Reality *
> *Founding President, Two-Year College Sociological
> Society *
> *Address: Department of Sociology, Johnson County Community
> College *
> * 12345 College Blvd., Overland Park, KS 66210-1299
> U.S.A. *
> *Phones: 913/469-8500, ext.3376 (Office) and 913/768-4244
> (Home) *
> *Fax: 913/469-4409 Science of Reality BBS: 913/768-1113 (8-N-1; 14.4
> kbps) *
> *Email: mfoster@tyrell.net or mfoster@jccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us
> (Internet); *
> * 72642,3105 (Staff, Three CompuServe Religion Forums);UWMG94A
> (Prod.);*
> * Realityman (America Online Ethics and Religion Forum Remote
> Staff); *
> * RealityDude (MSN);Realityman19 (CNet);Realityman
> (Interchange) *
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * *
>
> >From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzMon Dec 18 23:09:49 1995
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 15:44:17 +1300
> From: Robert Johnston
> To: Juan R Cole , talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: Re: Review / Provisional Translations
>
> Juan Cole wrote:
>
> >
> >Those lay Baha'is who are so eager to tell professional Baha'i historians
> >and philosophers how they should do things would be well advised to listen
> >to us when we say that their suggestions are impractical and have a
> >deleterious effect upon Baha'i scholarship (and thence upon a number of
> >other important areas--publication of journal articles, incorporation of
> >accurate accounts into reference works, public knowledge of the Faith,
> >and teaching persons of capacity).
>
> Judas, as 'Abdu'l-Baha points out, was the brightest of the disciples. I
> guess what got Judas in the end was arrogance... More mildly, Fadl was
> humbled by a mere blacksmith... The Master also wrote that the early
> Christians, though unlettered, were genuine philosophers... But of course
> these don't apply here. They just came to mind, that's all. Nothing
> personal....
>
> >From my keyboard to God's ear,
>
> Robert.
>
> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 23:42:58 -0500 (EST)
> From: Juan R Cole
> To: "Mark A. Foster"
> Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: Re: Lay Baha`is?
>
>
>
> Mark: You were disturbed because you misunderstood. The distinction
> between the clerics and the laity is not the one I was drawing. In
> secular, American society, the word "lay" has now taken on other
> connotations.
>
> In academic parlance a "lay" reader is one who is not an academic expert
> (usually, not a Ph.D.) in the subject of the book. "Lay" readers are
> contrasted in the book trade with professional experts.
>
> So, if I tell an editor I have written a book on Middle Eastern history,
> the editor will want to know if the audience for the book is other
> specialists (i.e. other academics, in which case the press run will be
> 500) or if the audience is the "lay reader" (everyone else, in which case
> the press run will be rather larger).
>
> With regard to religion as a spiritual practice, all Baha'is are equal
> and all have valuable insights into the spiritual life. I have said this
> so many times that it is hard for me to believe you could so
> misunderstand me. But if I wanted to have an expert evaluation of the
> import of the teachings about economics in the Writings, I myself would
> prefer to hear from someone with an academic training in economics.
>
> Mark, I am sure you are aware of this *secular* connotation of the
> terminology I was employing. So I am taken aback by the visceral
> character of your remarks. I'm also confused as to how you think I could
> categorize myself as a "professional" Baha'i, since I hold no post in the
> Faith, have never drawn a salary for my services to it, and have even
> foregone most of the royalties my books and translations have earned.
> I'm simply saying that I promise not to tell the electrical engineers how to
> wire houses and they should please not tell me how to write history.
>
> To the extent that academic Babi and Baha'i history exists as a field,
> it is a very small one; most of its specialist academic practitioners are
> or have been on Talisman. But there is a difference between doing
> history in a professional, academic manner, employing the original
> languages (which takes years of study, even for native speakers),
> weighting sources, contextualizing events and ideas, and so forth--there
> is a difference between that and an Anglophone engineer reading the
> Dawnbreakers on a Saturday afternoon or someone writing up a pastiche of
> secondary sources for a Baha'i little magazine. The latter activities
> are praiseworthy too, but they constitute a different language game.
>
> So, I agree that there are not lay Baha'is and professional Baha'is
> (though some people do make a career in Baha'i administration). But
> there is such a thing as professional history of the Baha'i religion and
> lay Baha'i (and non-Baha'i) readers of it. And I think it is rash for
> someone who has not spent the time to learn the languages and do the graduate
> study necessary to enter the field to tell someone who has how to go about his
> or her business.
>
> Steve Scholl posted a very nice piece months ago about how academic
> scholarship is like plumbing. Other plumbers are not impressed that you
> know plumbing. They might watch your technique, see how careful you are,
> talk about sawhorse joints with you. But we have a religion in which
> non-plumbers are constantly telling the plumbers how they have to fix the
> pipes, and as a result the religion has sprung enormous numbers of leaks
> that in my view have begun to undermine the foundation. There is no
> point calling this point of view elitist. Either you know plumbing or
> you do not. If you do not, stand aside and let a craftsman pursue the craft.
>
>
> cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan
>
>
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 19:03:50 +1300 (NZDT)
> From: Robert Johnston
> To: Dave10018@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: Re: EVOLUTION
>
> Dear Dave,
> I think it was the teacher who strapped me who introduced me to
> the Lindsay poem. Years letter I was told his nickname was Bubblegum. Hey
> Buddy: am I in therapy here, and if so, are you charging?
>
> Robert.
>
> PS I think Juan made a pretty good job of "Re: Lay Baha'is"...
>
> >Robert! You went to a horrible grade school and were terribly mistreated.
> >Really I grieve for you, but you must struggle against such "education," and
> >not try to impose it on us here. As I recall at the same school where
> you and
> >your friend were given such cruel corporal punishment, you were made to
> >memorize Vachel Lindsay's rhythmic but incredibly racist poem "The Congo(a
> >study of the Negro Race)".
> >
> >with concern,
> >
> >dave taylor
>
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 10:29:44 -0600 (CST)
> From: "Mark A. Foster"
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: Re: Lay Baha`is?
>
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
>
> Hi, Juan -
>
> Thank you for taking the time to clarify what you said. I was
> careful not to mention you by name so as not to give the appearance that
> I was making a personal remark. In spite of our disagreements on various
> substantive and methodological issues (though, contrary to a recent
> posting by someone else, I am not opposed to historical criticism and,
> as I have said, the research design for my Ph.D. dissertation included
> use of this technique), I have nothing but respect for you and your work
> on the Faith. I definitely did not intend my comments to come across as
> visceral, but I apologize if that is how they appeared. As you know,
> cyberspace is a difficult medium to work in.
>
> In my Social Problems class, I use a reader which contains a variety
> of articles written to many types of audiences, and I have my students
> distinguish, for instance, between those which were written for an
> academic/professional readership, on the one hand, and a lay readership
> on the other. However, when the term "lay Catholics" (or the Catholic
> laity) is used, it is generally to contrast such persons with those who
> are full-time priests, sisters, brothers, etc.
>
> I hope that clarifies the reason I misunderstood you. Personally,
> I might refer to Toffler or Hoffer as lay "sociologists" or, especially
> in the case of Toffler, as a writer who popularizes sociological ideas
> for a lay readership. OTOH, while I might speak of Baha'is (and others)
> who are lay readers (or laypersons) in relation to a particular field
> I would probably not refer to someone as a lay Baha'i. In that sense,
> we are, of course, all lay Baha'is. But it is probably just
> semantics.
>
> Warmest regards to you,
>
> Mark
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * *
> *Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion
> (Structuralist) *
> *President (1995), Kansas Sociological
> Society *
> *Academic Director (and Kansas Dir.), Foundation for the Science of
> Reality *
> *Founding President, Two-Year College Sociological
> Society *
> *Address: Department of Sociology, Johnson County Community
> College *
> * 12345 College Blvd., Overland Park, KS 66210-1299
> U.S.A. *
> *Phones: 913/469-8500, ext.3376 (Office) and 913/768-4244
> (Home) *
> *Fax: 913/469-4409 Science of Reality BBS: 913/768-1113 (8-N-1; 14.4
> kbps) *
> *Email: mfoster@tyrell.net or mfoster@jccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us
> (Internet); *
> * 72642,3105 (Staff, Three CompuServe Religion Forums);UWMG94A
> (Prod.);*
> * Realityman (America Online Ethics and Religion Forum Remote
> Staff); *
> * RealityDude (MSN);Realityman19 (CNet);Realityman
> (Interchange) *
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * *
>
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 11:53:40 -0500 (EST)
> From: Juan R Cole
> To: "Mark A. Foster"
> Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: Re: Lay Baha`is?
>
>
>
> Mark: Glad that's been cleared up. Of course, I am a layman in most
> fields, myself, including music, physics, engineering, etc. (the list is
> endless). :-)
>
> I sympathize about cyberspace being a tough medium in which to avoid
> misunderstandings, and know that in the past I have similarly
> misunderstood your intent on occasion. And I always enjoy and admire
> your postings on sociology.
>
> cheers Juan
>
>
> From: Rick Schaut
> To: "Mark A. Foster" , Juan R Cole
> Cc: "talisman@indiana.edu"
> Subject: RE: Lay Baha`is?
>
> Dear Juan, Mark and Friends,
>
> From: Juan R Cole[SMTP:jrcole@umich.edu]
> >Mark: You were disturbed because you misunderstood. The distinction
> >between the clerics and the laity is not the one I was drawing. In
> >secular, American society, the word "lay" has now taken on other
> >connotations.
>
> >In academic parlance a "lay" reader is one who is not an academic expert
> >(usually, not a Ph.D.) in the subject of the book. "Lay" readers are
> >contrasted in the book trade with professional experts.
>
> A few thoughts:
>
> 1) I'm inclined to believe that neither connotation is appropriate as a
> distinction between two different Baha'is. This is not to say that
> there was any invalid motive behind the use of the term. However,
> it's, perhaps, best to avoid use of the term altogether. Such
> distinctions, no matter how well meant, can be dangerous, and
> are, at their heart, divisive.
>
> 2) A distinction which is not divisive, however, is the distinction
> between an institution and the individuals who attempt to serve
> in its functions. To find the decision of an institution unacceptable
> because the institution doesn't have the right kind of people
> serving on it runs, to my mind, very counter to those principles
> which underlie the design and creation of these institutions.
>
> 3) I may not know the craft of a plumber. However, if I'm not
> satisfied with the plumber's work, I believe I have the right to
> ask that the job be redone.
>
>
> Warmest Regards,
> Rick Schaut
>
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 15:33:55 -0500 (EST)
> From: Juan R Cole
> To: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
> Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: RE: Lay Baha`is?
>
>
>
> Rick and Quanta, despite my clarification that I was *not* speaking of a
> clerical/laity distinction, continue to object to the use of the word
> "lay" to describe non-experts.
>
> They must, I am afraid, direct their objections to some other quarter,
> such as Webster's Dictionary (or the various Webster's), since this is
> simply established English usage (as Mark Foster has also admitted).
>
> This entire episode, it seems to me, is an extended exercise in blaming
> the victim. Academic historians and philosophers have put many years
> into learning a craft which the Writings themselves tell us is of benefit
> to humankind. But then Baha'i academics are not allowed to practice this
> craft freely, but rather are burdened with all sorts of unrealistic
> constraints. And when the poor scholars dare to point out that these
> constraints rather prevent them from serving the Faith as they would
> wish, they are denounced as elitist and arrogant. No doubt many slaves
> in galleys who dared complain about the whip were also being elitist and
> arrogant.
>
> I am sympathetic to an egalitarian sense of religion, in which the
> spiritual insights of all are valued, and I think I have posted in the
> past on how much I have learned spiritually from non-academics.
>
> This latter is not the point, however, and I suspect you all know it.
> The point is that in addition to its spiritual core, which is equally
> accessible to all, any religion has a number of aspects that are best
> approached through expertise. The Baha'i scriptures work out of a body
> of Greco-Islamic concepts, and if one wishes to understand the
> *philosophy* (in the academic disciplinary sense) of the Baha'i
> scriptures, then John Walbridge and Keven Brown's sort of training is
> clearly an asset. Does anyone wish to argue the contrary?
>
> As for the Baha'i institutions, they have only a
> legislative/administrative purpose and were not erected in order to tell
> people what to think or how to write history or philosophy, nor are they
> qualified to do so.
>
> While it is true, Rick, that if you personally hire a plumber to do work,
> and you are not satisfied with it, you may ask him to re-do it. However,
> when the plumber is working on his own or a third party's house, it would
> be rude of you to break down the door and harangue him about his
> technique with the L joints simply on the pretext that he lives in your
> community, more especially if you, as you say, had no particular training in
> plumbing
> yourself.
>
>
> cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
>
>
>
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 15:56:25 -0600 (CST)
> From: "Mark A. Foster"
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: RE: Lay Baha`is?
>
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
>
> Juan R Cole wrote to talisman@indiana.edu:
>
> J >They must, I am afraid, direct their objections to some other quarter,
> J >such as Webster's Dictionary (or the various Webster's), since this is
> J >simply established English usage (as Mark Foster has also admitted).
>
> Juan,
>
> Not to belabor the point, but since you have mentioned me, please
> allow me to clarify:
>
> I realize that the term "lay" can be correctly used to refer to
> someone who is not an expert in some particular field. As I have said,
> that is how I make use of this term in my Social Problems classes.
> Thus, individuals can be laypersons (or laity) in relation to one or
> another field. However, you referred to "lay Baha'is."
>
> I certainly appreciated your clarification that you did not intend
> an approximation of the standard clerical/laity distinction. However,
> even as someone accustomed to this term, if I read someone writing about
> "lay Baha'is," my assumption would be that she or he were making some
> sort of elitist distinction between Baha'is. I now accept that you did
> not
> intend it that way, but, given that, I feel that your usage was somewhat
> confusing and not technically correct. Would it not have been more
> accurate to refer to those who were not professional historians rather
> than to "lay Baha'is"?
>
> In addition, one of the other list members posted a message today
> which said that there are very few true Baha'is scholars, or words to
> that effect. My feeling is that this message might be reflective of what
> I would regard as a very narrow view of Baha'i scholarship - one limited
> to those who engage in study of the Arabic/Persian primary sources.
>
> Warm greetings to you,
>
> Mark
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * *
> *Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion
> (Structuralist) *
> *President (1995), Kansas Sociological
> Society *
> *Academic Director (and Kansas Dir.), Foundation for the Science of
> Reality *
> *Founding President, Two-Year College Sociological
> Society *
> *Address: Department of Sociology, Johnson County Community
> College *
> * 12345 College Blvd., Overland Park, KS 66210-1299
> U.S.A. *
> *Phones: 913/469-8500, ext.3376 (Office) and 913/768-4244
> (Home) *
> *Fax: 913/469-4409 Science of Reality BBS: 913/768-1113 (8-N-1; 14.4
> kbps) *
> *Email: mfoster@tyrell.net or mfoster@jccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us
> (Internet); *
> * 72642,3105 (Staff, Three CompuServe Religion Forums);UWMG94A
> (Prod.);*
> * Realityman (America Online Ethics and Religion Forum Remote
> Staff); *
> * RealityDude (MSN);Realityman19 (CNet);Realityman
> (Interchange) *
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * *
>
>
>
>
> ___
> * UniQWK #2141* The manifested Unity of God emanates in His creation's
> diversity
>
> >From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzTue Dec 19 17:10:06 1995
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 11:04:39 +1300 (NZDT)
> From: Robert Johnston
> To: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT , talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: RE: Lay Baha`is?
>
> ffolks,
>
> Whatever the explanation, and after a night sleeping on it, I have to admit
> to still getting a little chicken bone in my throat over the expression
> "lay Baha'is". While it has to be acknowledged that the person of skill
> should receive his/her due (ref; in the Writings: the person of science has
> a great right [or somesuch]) I question some of the distinctions/categories
> given by our esteemed Juan R. Cole (PhD). How can I say this? Hmm. A
> story...
>
> OK. Let's say Juan asserts the philosophical excellence of "Fred Smith",
> who happens to be his close friend and a PhD. Let's say Juan goes further
> than that and says that no one around can come close to Fred Smith's level
> of excellence. Let's say, also, that Juan asserts that the generality of
> Baha'is are bound to listen to this already too snotty Freddy on
> philosophical matters, because they don't have PhDs and haven't been
> endorsed by JRC PhD... Can't you see? The situation is sewn-up in a mesh
> of "expert" prison-wire that would make even Foucault blanch. To top it all
> off, because the whole matter IS essentially philosophical, there's ol'
> snotty Fred playing Sherpa Tensing and Ed Hilliary on the highest summit,
> absolutely beyond impeachment.
>
> Now this just won't do!! Will it ;-} Huh? The proletariat will rebel,
> and lynch these oppressors, especially when it is discovered that old Fred
> doesn't really know what he is talking about, and isn't really a scholar's
> big toe, let alone a philosopher. Y'see, ol' Fred is perpetually
> contradicting the House, etc...
>
> Of course, I have exaggerated this story a little. But you'll get my
> point, if yer really think about it. But don't think me an entirely
> humourless kill-joy. I have an idea for lightening this topic. It
> includes widening its scope to include a passing reference to the other hot
> topic de jour, "unrelated men and women in same house." To start the ball
> [!] rolling, I'll put a simple question:"In what circumstances may we lay
> Baha'is?"
>
> Now if this topic is too rich for our refined tastes, perhaps we should
> discuss the suitablity of "lay Baha'is?" from another perspective. I
> mean...is it suggested that Baha'i women should be brood hens for the
> Faith?
>
> Utterly lay but could be more laid back,
>
> Robert.
>
> >From richs@microsoft.comWed Dec 20 11:00:10 1995
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 16:41:40 -0800
> From: Rick Schaut
> To: Juan R Cole
> Subject: RE: Lay Baha`is?
>
> Dear Juan,
>
> >Rick and Quanta, despite my clarification that I was *not* speaking of a
> >clerical/laity distinction, continue to object to the use of the word
> >"lay" to describe non-experts.
>
> >They must, I am afraid, direct their objections to some other quarter,
> >such as Webster's Dictionary (or the various Webster's), since this is
> >simply established English usage (as Mark Foster has also admitted).
>
> Sorry, Juan, but my suggestion that the term not be employed was
> based, in part, upon Webster's (definition #2 _Webster's New World
> Dictionary, Third College Edition_). Had I not known you and your
> intent, I probably would have been offended at the use of the word.
>
> >This entire episode, it seems to me, is an extended exercise in blaming
> >the victim.
>
> In no circumstance which has been related to me, either in private
> or in public fora, have the victims been, themselves, stainless. To
> _some_ extent, the worst episodes in our history have involved an
> escalation of hostile feelings which could have been stopped by
> _either_ party. Two wrongs don't make a right.
>
> >While it is true, Rick, that if you personally hire a plumber to do
> work,
> >and you are not satisfied with it, you may ask him to re-do it.
> However,
> >when the plumber is working on his own or a third party's house...
>
> I had the Encyclopedia project in mind what I extended your
> analogy.
>
>
> Warmest Regards,
> Rick Schaut
>
>
> >From TLCULHANE@aol.comWed Dec 20 11:01:38 1995
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 19:59:50 -0500
> From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: re: lay Bahai
>
> Dear friends ,
>
> I would have thought Juakn's explanation of the term "lay" would have
> sufficed . Abdul Baha in Secret of Divine Civilization clearlt recognizes
> the existence of professional experts. He calls for the convening of a body
> of " experts " to assist legislators , assuming that said representatives do
> not meet the criteria of "comprehensive knowledge." And lacking such
> "knowledge" the representatives would be "unequal in an emergency". Now
> uless we assume Abdul Baha is being an intellectual snob here it seems we
> should honor his wishes and respect those with "expert " knowledge as being
> essential to the proper functioning of the Commonwealth. It is instructive
> to ponder Abdul Baha's comments in this regard . He discusses the
> category of
> the "learned " in such subject areas as sacred Scirtures , divine and
> natural science , religious jurisprudence and the arts of government and my
> goodness how did this one slip inthere " . .and the great events of history
> ." Apparently Abdul Baha thought historians were of some importance to the
> functioning of the legislature and among others shoud be consulted for the
> expert knowledge .
>
> One of the most common forms of anti - intellectualism is to create a
> caricature which is meant to demean the character of the possessor of
> knowledge . If someone can find passages from Abdul Baha that support the
> belittling of "expert " knowledge which he suggests is essential to the
> "order and equilibrium of society please let me know . As he points out ">.
> The first attribute of perfection is learning and the cultural
> attainments of
> the mind . "
> If as a lay bahai I do not have that "attribute " and wish to acquire
> "comprehensive knowledge" how might I acquire the same ? Surely is does not
> come from ridiculing those who do and can assist in its realization .
>
> warm regards ,
> Terry
>
>
> >From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzWed Dec 20 11:05:05 1995
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 15:24:10 +1300 (NZDT)
> From: Robert Johnston
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: re: lay Bahai
>
> Dear Terry,
> Re:
> >
> > I would have thought Juakn's explanation of the term "lay" would have
> >sufficed .
>
> If you think Juan should have the last word on this matter , good and fine,
> but please don't try to insist that your values need prevail. This is a
> discursive context, friend. Hope you don't mind if the talking continues.
>
> If I need a philosopher I'll go to Plato. If I need an historian I'll go
> to Horodotus. The only living learned I defer to in matters spiritual are
> the Learned in El Abha -- Hands of the Cause and such...
>
> If I need someone who encompasses everything excellent in thought, I'll go
> to 'Abdu'l-Baha...
>
> If that is anti-intellectual, so be it.
>
> I trust you will regain your good humour soon,
>
> Robert.
>
> >From nima@unm.eduWed Dec 20 11:07:02 1995
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 21:40:56 -0700 (MST)
> From: Sadra
> To: Robert Johnston
> Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: Techne (re: lay Bahai)
>
> Dear Robert--
>
> Hello! And how is the summer over there in New Zealand treating you ;-)
> Hope
> all is well.
>
> Allow me to jump to Juan and Terry's defense. You mentioned Plato as
> one of the sources you would go to for philosophy. Well, we share in a
> common regard - as you well know. However, you invoked Plato to take
> issue in the "laity vs experts" question. Let me say this: I agree with
> both Juan and Terry on this point because I agree with Plato. Plato,
> on the other hand, would not necessarily agree with your enumeration.
> In Plato's weltanschauung (there's my favorite German word again!) there
> are
> definitely those who know and those who do not, those who can and those
> who cannot...Both Plato and Aristotle speak of _techne_ when in comes to
> expertise on specific matters. Actually translators have often rendered
> the word exactly in this way, expertise - although "craft," "skill" etc
> are also usually used. W.L. Reese in his _Dictionary of Philosophy and
> Religion_ Humanities Press, inc. (New Jersey: 1980), p. 570, left hand
> column, defines "techne" as such:
>
> "A Greek term referring to knowledge and application of principles
> involved in the production of objects and the accomplishment of specific
> ends. For Aristotle, where "episteme" implies disinterested knowledge of
> principles and leads to theoretical science, "teche" implies the
> application of principles and relates to productive science."
>
> For the Greeks there is a "techne" to everything: administration, art,
> philosophising, scholarship, and, yes, even living right, etc. etc. And
> this implies doing it well; if a task is not accomplished well, then
> the person exercising it does not possess "techne" and is therefore not
> in any qualified position to pass judgement on the specific enterprise in
> question - period. This is implied in all of Plato's dialogues where the
> dialogue invariably ends in aporia, no solution. The purpose of this is
> that
> Socrates demonstrates to his interlocutor that he, the interlocutor,
> really
> doesn't _know_ (episteme or noesis, take your pick) or understand what
> he's
> talking about and that he is merely exercising belief or opinion on the
> matter, which for Plato is at the lower epistemological rung of things
> because it does not conform with "certainty," the goal of knowledge. I
> direct your attention to some of the early and middle dialogues like the
> Ion, Laches, Lysis, Charmides, Hippias Minor, Hippias Major, Euthydemus,
> Gorgias and especially Euthyphro. Also see Aristotle's Nichomachean and
> Eudemian Ethics, On Rhetoric, The Politics and the Poetics. That should
> keep you busy for a while (no pun intended) ;-)
>
> Now in regard to Baha'i scholarship, there are certainly people who
> know -
> those who possess the techne of scholarly methodology & analysis - and
> those
> obviously who do not. This is pretty basic stuff here and has nothing to
> do
> with elitism! Therefore in regard to scholarship _specifically_ there is
> self-evidently a laity and a non-laity in the Baha'i community: those who
> know what they're talking about; those who know somewhat about what
> they're talking about and those who absolutely do not have a clue about
> what they're talking about. However, this does not detract from the fact
> that as _individuals_, naked before the Almighty, all are potentially of
> the same rank and equal. We are all God's vicegerents here, and no
> one is arguing otherwise. But, as the Holy Quran so eloquently states,
> "Are they equal those who know and those who do not?" The answer is an
> obvious and emphatic, no! And such is the raison d'etre of life, "For
> every one who knows, there is one above who knows more." After all, we're
> not communists here ([c] Tatalia, Godfather I) :-)
>
> All Juan, Terry, John, Linda, myself and others are saying is let
> the technicians to their craft (techne), and nothing more. Why this
> should
> sound threatening or elitist to some is quite beyond me.
>
> Btw, doesn't Baha'u'llah say, "Blessed are the learned in Baha"?
>
> Yours,
> Nima
> ---
> O God, cause us to see things as they really are - Hadith
>
> "In the mirror of their minds, the forms of transcendent realities are
> reflected, and the lamp of their inner vision derives its light from the
> Sun of Universal Knowledge" - Secret of Divine Civilization
>
> >From SFotos@eworld.comWed Dec 20 11:10:21 1995
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 22:02:42 -0800
> From: SFotos@eworld.com
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
> Cc: jjensen@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu
> Subject: lay Baha'is and academics
>
>
> Dear Talismans,
>
> Here's something that my dissertation chairman, Rod Ellis, told me after my
> defense. I think it's relevant to considerations that Linda and others have
> raised about a general lack of appreciation for the Baha'i Mid-Eastern
> scholars.
>
> "It's called 'Post-dissertation depression,'" Rod said. "A person spends
> years, studying, passing language exams, doing research and finally writing
> the dissertation and then what? Well, usually nothing. No one congratulates
> you, appreciates you, there is no special reward, and you still get wet when
> it rains! And sometimes the recognition never comes despite your best
> effort..."
>
> If this is true in the large applied field of English language education, how
> much more true must it be for Mid-Eastern History. In this area, even the
> general scholars--let alone the Baha'i-- have to learn several extremely
> difficult languages, get hold of primary sources under difficult and
> dangerous conditions, be expert translators and then, after a long period of
> writing exhaustively (characteristic of historians, versus us social science
> types, who can whip up very credible research reports in a matter of
> weeks/months) publish their work for a very limited readership. Furthermore,
> instead of literally thousands of journals providing a publication venue in
> the fields of education or language, I wonder how many there are in
> Mid-Eastern History. Probably not many...
>
> And then the Baha'i scholars have to put up with attacks from Muslim and
> other colleagues. On top of this, they often don't receive recognition for
> their hard study and years of effort from many of the Baha'is who they are
> try to serve and inform.
>
> Well, North America is noted for an anti-intellectual tendency--seen in the
> highly pejorative terms designating intellectuals: eggheads, nerds, geeks,
> etc. We shouldn't really be surprised if this trend is sometimes shows up the
> Baha'i community, despite the emphasis on excellence and scholarship in the
> Writings. The scholars must just continue the march out of love for their
> field and their Faith, and put expectations behind them.
>
> One thing which might help is to set up a way to publish"working paper"
> versions of work in progress; for example, Talisman Working Papers,
> consisting of edited posts, opinion pieces, etc. In my field, these are put
> out by specific institutions or groups for the members, and therefore don't
> require blind peer review outside the institution. I have learned so much by
> following the posts of the Mid-Eastern scholars and have my own archives for
> further study. This material should be disseminated more widely somehow.
>
> Disclaimer: This idea has probably been proposed many times by many people,
> so forgive this new member if I'm covering old ground.
>
> Best,
> Sandy Fotos
>
>
>
> >From JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduWed Dec 20 11:15:08 1995
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 95 09:28:50 EWT
> From: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: Intellectual elitism
>
> Justice compels me to say that, contrary to what Sandy Fotos not
> unreasonably assumes,
> I myself at least have received nothing but courtesy and respect as a
> Baha'i from my Muslim colleagues, Muslim teachers, Muslim students,
> Muslim clergy, and Muslim laymen.
>
> The real problem with these difficulties is not that people's feelings are
> hurt--the Baha'is in Middle East studies are reasonably successful as
> a group, thank you--but that it discourages people from doing things.
> I have done translations of Arabic poetry and Islamic philosophy but not
> of Baha'i texts--simply because I know that it would be too much trouble
> or very likely impossible to get a Baha'i translation approved and published.
> I spent eleven years off and on, four of them full time, working on the
> Baha'i Encyclopedia--12,000-14,000 hours of my time, not counting
> what other people have done--only to see the project stopped at the last
> minute. I am therefore not likely to undertake any other large Baha'i
> projects. I do not encourage Baha'i students to go into this field.
> Nor, for similar reasons, would I agree to supervise a
> dissertation by a Baha'i on a Baha'i topic.
>
> Similar problems arise in other areas: Sonya can speak to the arts. I
> have friends interested in television production who have encountered
> similar problems.
>
> The cost of fiascos in these specialized areas is cumulative. My generation
> of Baha'is produced maybe ten people with the qualifications to do
> serious study of Babi and Baha'i history and literature in the original
> languages. How much Baha'i work have we gotten out of these people
> compared to what we might have had?
>
> john walbridge
>
>
>
> >From mfoster@tyrell.netWed Dec 20 11:23:27 1995
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 10:06:16 -0600 (CST)
> From: "Mark A. Foster"
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: re: lay Baha`i
>
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
>
> Terry, I do not see any evidence of anti-intellectualism in this
> discussion. Nor do I see how questioning the merits of using a
> particular term could, in any sense, be construed as anti-intellectual.
> However, speaking nonspecifically, I only hope that we, as a list, will
> not, once again, return to the old pattern of defining the parameters of
> what is and is not intellectual by confusing the single pointedness of
> truth with onesidedness of understanding.
>
> Warm regards,
>
> Mark
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> * *
> *Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion
> (Structuralist) *
>
>
> >From jrcole@umich.eduWed Dec 20 12:12:57 1995
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 11:59:10 -0500 (EST)
> From: Juan R Cole
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: expertise
>
>
>
> I'm amused at how this discussion has spun out of control, and the
> original terms of debate have ended up being reversed or taken in
> tangents. Electronic mail is the perfect postmodern form of
> communication, discontinuous, ambiguous, impossible to nail down,
> deconstructing itself, and constantly subject to Chaos in the sense of
> nonlinear dynamic development.
>
> We began, you will remember, with the question of provisional
> translations and current policies regarding the quotation and translation
> of the Writings by Baha'i scholars.
>
> John and I pointed out that translation is key to writing scholarship,
> and retranslation is often necessary in order to make technical points.
> Just to give an example, in my article on *The Concept of Manifestation*
> for ABS, published in 1982, I wanted to discuss some technical
> philosophical points from Some Answered Questions, and to quote
> `Abdu'l-Baha in my technical translation. (The current "official"
> translation of Some Answered Questions is extremely flawed and is useless
> for technical scholarship; this is now being remedied by the House). I
> was instructed by the Research Department that I had to quote the current
> translation, but could put more technical paraphrases in the footnotes.
>
> My question is, "why?" If I were a Christian or Muslim theologian or
> philosopher or historian, I would not have to be saddled with such Mickey
> Mouse rules when I wrote. And the fact is, this sort of intererence with
> scholarship makes it difficult to produce. Paraphrase is not always a
> satisfactory alternative to quotation. I just don't understand what
> would be wrong with quoting my translation and simply noting in a
> parenthesis that it is my translation.
>
> So, we began by pointing out that these extensive rules hem scholars in
> and make it difficult to get anything done. And I said that
> non-historians and non-philosophers shouldn't be making rules for
> professional historians and philosophers.
>
> My mild complaint was seized upon as a power-grab and an assertion of
> elitism and a demand for deference and all sorts of things it was not.
>
> Although I appreciate Sandy's canny commentary on post-Ph.D. depression,
> I have to say that putting things this way misreads the problem. The
> problem is not that Baha'i Middle East scholars feel underappreciated by
> the community. With the exception of a couple of rude postings on
> Talisman by people I do not know, I have always been treated very well by
> the Baha'i community (no doubt better than I deserve), and don't seek any
> special appreciation, and *certainly* not "deference" (as if there were a
> danger of *that* from this crew)! Nor do I think such things are sought
> by
> Moojan Momen, John Walbridge, Frank Lewis, Susan Stiles Maneck, Sholeh
> Quinn or others. As for professional success, Baha'is in the Middle East
> field appear to have done disproportionately well--History at Yale,
> Harvard, Michigan, Ohio State;, two Persianists at Chicago, Islamics at
> McGill, with people coming up through good and hard-to-get-into graduate
> programs such as UCLA and UC-Berkeley. All of this is a remarkable
> success story. The problem lies elsewhere.
>
> You all know the story, told by `Abdu'l-Baha, about how two American
> women pilgrims on their way to Haifa stopped in Alexandria to see Mirza
> Abu'l-Fadl. They knocked on his door. No response. They knocked
> again. A voice came from within, in accented English, "Mirza Abu'l-Fadl
> is not home." :-)
>
> Mirza Abu'l-Fadl sometimes needed to be left alone, in order to get some
> work done. And with regard to the maze of regulations foisted upon us by
> the Research Department, I would say most Baha'i Middle East scholars
> feel a need to be left alone to get some work done. That's all.
>
> Academic Baha'i scholarship is only one discourse among many in the
> community, and it will become influential only if it competes well in the
> market of Baha'i ideas. I should think it is obvious that it is and will
> for long be a rather minority taste, and the idea of it becoming
> hegemonic in the community strikes me as a fantasy. That it should be
> available to the community in case aspects of it are found useful,
> however, is very important. Those who fear its hegemony or deference to
> it should please explain by what mechanisms any Baha'is will be
> successfully made to wade through the philological discussions in *Baha'i
> Studies Bulletin*!
>
> The hidden debate here is not about the danger of this small and
> relatively inaccessible discourse taking over; it is about whether it
> should be allowed at all, as an alternative to literalism, esotericism or
> administrationism, or should rather be carefully caged and perhaps even
> crushed. The issue is pluralism and unity in diversity.
>
> cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
>
>
From StrayMutt@aol.comThu Mar 21 10:16:09 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:05:31 -0500
From: StrayMutt@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: German Baha'i Community
Hello, again
Can anyone out there refer me to a good English-language history of the
German Baha'i community around the time of World War II? I'm curious about
the Nazi repression of the Baha'i Faith, what form it took, the response of
the community, the Guardian's role in advising the community, etc. Since --
unglucklicherweise, mein Deutsch ist nicht so gut -- English will have to do.
Danke schoen. Bob Ballenger
From jwinters@epas.utoronto.caThu Mar 21 10:16:41 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:52:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonah Winters
To: talisman
Subject: Paper on "Erotic" Mysticism
Greetings, Talisdenizens;
Last month I offerd to share with people my paper on "Themes of
'The Erotic' in Baha'i Mysticism." (Don't worry, I carefully defined
"erotic," and it has very little to do with sex.) I decided to introduce
the topic with the Sufi background, where I explored uses of erotic
imagery in Rabi'a, Hallaj, Ibn al-Farid, Ibn al-Arabi, al-Ghazzali, and
Rumi, as well as mentions of things like Freud and the Song of Solomon.
Well, after 33 pages of intro, I realized that I just wasn't going to get
to Baha'u'llah in this paper! But if anyone wants a copy anyway, let me
know, and I'll mail it out as an email (not those pesky attached
files).
Here's a caveat: I think it's a fairly coherent paper, but 1) it
is just survey, and 2) I'm a beginner in the field, so I offer it not as
valuable research as much as comments on an interesting subject.
Email me privately if you want a copy.
-Jonah
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jonah and Kari Winters
33 Endean Avenue / Toronto, Ontario / M4M-1W5 / (416) 461-3527
From rstockman@usbnc.orgThu Mar 21 10:17:49 1996
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 96 15:06:12
From: "Stockman, Robert"
To: mfoster@qni.com, "Stephen R. Friberg"
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re[2]: Talisman as Comedy

But yet I see is a group of folks who, sometimes desperately, want to
be recognized as Baha'i intellectuals. Listen to Talisman with your
heart open: you will hear the deep, soul-wrenching anguish
of those who feel unaccepted, unappreciated, and unloved.
Now, if you were to point out to me that correlated with
this anguish are attempts to put others down, i.e.,
self-elevation by denigration of others, I would have to
reply that you were indeed correct. The fatal flaw, the
moral of this Talismanian drama, is in plain sight and clear
to all who wish to see.
Stephen, I very much agree with you here. Sometimes Talisman very
much saddens me this way. Personally, I think we should drop the
word "scholar" altogether and replace it by "writer," "researcher,"
"academic," or other words, depending on context. The result would
be more precise language and clearer communication. Even the word
"intellectual" can be highly unreliable, since anyone with
intellectual curiosity, in my opinion, could be termed an
"intellectual" in some sense (and under the right circumstances that
includes most human beings). I'm not sure if there is any solution
to what I see as deep-seated personal insecurity being expressed in
some postings. Nor may there be any solution to Covenantally
questionable comments (and I take an earlier message from the House
of Justice to give us permission to raise the Covenantal issue). I
was hoping the chance to speak one's insecurities would allow people
to release them cathartically. In some cases the result has been the
opposite; insecurities encourage each other.
-- Rob Stockman
-- Rob Stockman
From 0007368608@mcimail.comThu Mar 21 10:18:30 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 03:48 EST
From: Dariush Lamie <0007368608@mcimail.com>
To: "talisman@indiana.edu"
Subject: Happy Naw-Ruz
-- [ From: Dariush Lamie * EMC.Ver #2.3 ] --
Happy Naw-Ruz to our scholars Dr. Walbrige, Dr. Cole, Dr. Rabbani and all
others and *thank* you for all your *excellent* and *informative* postings.
Dariush Lamie
From sadra@rt66.comThu Mar 21 10:19:47 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 02:28:33 -0700 (MST)
From: Sadra
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Insecure Scholars?
I must disagree with my good friend Stephen Friberg and Rob Stockman (a
person I have the deepest level of respect for) on this somewhat
'Red-Herring' sounding accusation of intellectual insecurity on the
part of certain prominent individuals on Talisman. No need to mention
which persons are being tacitly refered to, but I personally find the
said individuals quite secure in what they know and the fact that they
are first rate intellectuals, second to none in the Baha'i community.
Perhaps some of their expressed viewpoints have come across in the past, on
the surface, as controversial. My response: so what?! The burden of proof is
still upon their detractors. They have yet to produce one shred of
evidence from primary texts that what these "scholars" are saying is
foundationally wrong or "Covenantly suspect." IMO, those people who have
been protesting the loudest on Talisman, and on the outside, against
these "insecure scholars" have never really bothered to find out where
these "insecure scholars" are actually coming from, despite the fact that
these same "insecure scholars" have spelled out their approache(s) on
more than one occasion, in many different venues, under many different
circumstances. Mind you, I don't agree with everything they say -- let me
make that quite clear --, but I have at least tried to walk in their
proverbial mocassins (sp?) from time to time. How many of our
self-appointed therapists can claim they have completely, unbiasedly,
impartialy, non-judgementally and 'unreactively' done the same???
I do, on the other hand, find it rather curious that some people feel the
necessity to run to their proverbial administrative parent (under
somewhat bogus pretensions) every time they hear something not to their
liking, make an issue out of nothing, and how especially they clothe their
appeal in the language of "guidance from the institutions" when they are
quite capable of exercising their God-given discernment on paramount
issues. Among elementary school children they call this phenomena
tattle-taling. To me it sounds like the shoe is in reality on the other
foot -- if you catch my drift. But, then again, they say that one resists
against an idea or concept in proportion to the level that one is being
converted to it. So, who is 'really' being insecure here, guys?
Yes, these "scholars" have been hurt, demeaned, unappreciated, their
loyalty questioned, ad nauseum, but when all is said and done they are one
and all head and shoulders above the pettiness and narrow-minded
sectarian neo-Calvinism of so many in the American Baha'i community. Give
me insecure over Calvinists any day!
On the issue of scholars vs laity: the question can best be resolved by
making the simple distinction that a certain individual is a scholar by
profession (or calling) who also happens to be a Baha'i while another is
a Baha'i but lay on scholarly matters. Very simple. No need to turn it
into an existential problem.
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 Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlThu Mar 21 10:20:21 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 10:37:16 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: maqsud 1
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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A COMMENT BY BAHA'U'LLAH ON *THE CALAMITY*?
a provisional translation by Christopher Buck
___________________________________________________________
jazA-yi a`mAl-i ahl-i `Alam mutakavvin shud.
Retribution for the misdeeds of the people of the world has come into
being,
___________________________________________________________
va bi-SUrat-i `ulamA-yi jAhil-i munkir ZAhir [shud].
and has appeared in the form of ignorant, denying divines.
___________________________________________________________
IshAn-and qATi`An-i TarIq-i ilAhI va muDill-i `ibAd-i U.
These are the highwaymen of the Path and seducers of His servants.
___________________________________________________________
.. nAr-i In nufUs az nAr-i NamrUd mushta`al-tar mushAhidih
mIshavad.
The fire of these men is visibly more fierce than the fire of Nimrod.
___________________________________________________________
- the collective punishment for following the ulama rather than the Bab
and Baha'u'llah being to be ruled by these divines?
Sen
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlThu Mar 21 10:20:46 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 10:37:56 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: maqsud 2
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.
Gordon,
thanks for the response, but I don't see anything here that would
warrant a reading in terms of successively *higher* levels of
unity. 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. Union and concord are good in
specific matters and within certain measures, is the implication.
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.
Against social levelling, thus - perhaps against communistic
theories?
But there must be a specific historical reference, and it is
probably bound up in the words translated here as union and
concord.
John, you referred to a Arabic/Persian edition of *Tablets of
Baha'u'llah* published in Germany by the Publishing Trust in
1980. Is this the Ad'iyyih-i-Hadrat-i-Mahbub which they first
reprinted in 1980? I have the German catalogue, but there
doesn't seem to be anything corresponding to Tablets of
Baha'u'llah revealed after the Aqdas - just this collection of
tablets & prayers, Gleanings, Mathnavi-yi-mubaarak and Asul
'qayb bahaa'yaan, which does consist of selections from the
writings of Baha'u'llah. Images International has the same
range. If the book you refer to is not one of these I guess it is
out of print :-(
Sen
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlThu Mar 21 10:21:31 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 10:38:27 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: retraction
Thanks to David for sharing his letter to the Universal House of
Justice. I sincerely hope that it may prompt some satisfactory
closure of this affair, which can only be based on a clear picture
of what really happened - not just in the treatment of David but
in the NSA's initial response to the article "A Modest Proposal"
which Dialog proposed to publish. This needs to be followed by
a frank acknowledgement by the people and institutions
concerned of where mistakes were made, and those which have
not yet made their apologies need to do so.
I am sure that this affair has contributed to turning the American
Baha'i community from being the powerhouse of the world
community into a sleeping giant. A resolution would be greeted
with a sigh of relief from all around the world. It would 'redeem
the time' to some extent if some procedural improvements could
also be made - such as requiring that those whose voting rights
are in question should receive a written statement of the factors
involved, and steps to increase the clarity of the Universal
House of Justice's administrative and policy communications
with National Spiritual Assemblies and individual believers.
Who knows, perhaps this may even be the very thing - coming
at the last possible moment in the plan! - which will release the
pent-up forces pressing towards institutional maturation and take
the administrative order into new territories.
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 jwalbrid@indiana.eduThu Mar 21 10:22:32 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 07:52:11 -0500 (EST)
From: jwalbrid
To: StrayMutt@aol.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: German Baha'i Community
As I recall, there is a vivid account of the trial of Baha'is in
Stuttgart, I think, in one of the volumes of Baha'i World. In general,
you would be able to find a running account, though usually of a rather
superficial nature, in the "Survey of Current Baha'i Activities" in the
successive volumes of Baha'is World.
john walbridge
On Wed, 20 Mar 1996 StrayMutt@aol.com wrote:
> Hello, again
>
> Can anyone out there refer me to a good English-language history of the
> German Baha'i community around the time of World War II? I'm curious about
> the Nazi repression of the Baha'i Faith, what form it took, the response of
> the community, the Guardian's role in advising the community, etc. Since --
> unglucklicherweise, mein Deutsch ist nicht so gut -- English will have to do.
> Danke schoen. Bob Ballenger
>
From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comThu Mar 21 10:23:14 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 06:50:01 -0500
From: Ahang Rabbani
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Insecure Scholars?
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
I typically don't post "thank you" notes, but in case of Nima's
comments, I'm blown away by the excellence of his cogent remarks!
And once again, I stand humbled by his example of clarity of
thoughts and courage -- and for the record, I second every single
word he said.
Let me suggest that we give this thread a rest, however, as I see
no good coming out of calling each insecure, or worse, suggesting
questionable Covenantal comments, particularly when we all know
who the real target of all such accusations is and he's presently
away and not here to speak up. All of this talk about "insecure"
this or that has the smell of backbiting to me, so let's not
engage in it in this season of joy and felicity.
Happy Naw-Ruz to all.
best wishes, ahang.
From nineteen@onramp.netThu Mar 21 10:24:03 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 09:00:17 -0600 (CST)
From: "Richard C. Logan"
To: Robert Stockman , mfoster@qni.com,
Stephen Friberg
Cc: Talisman
Subject: Re: 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]
> Nor may there be any solution to Covenantally
>questionable comments (and I take an earlier message from the House
>of Justice to give us permission to raise the Covenantal issue). I
>was hoping the chance to speak one's insecurities would allow people
>to release them cathartically. In some cases the result has been the
>opposite; insecurities encourage each other.
Dearest Friends,
A person can certainly bring up the question of the covenant and in the most humble and evanescent manner bring to the attention of a friend their point of view. But one must be extremely cautious concerning the words of the House before taking that statement as a greenlight for "excessive speech".
What concerns, and I think rightly, members of this list, is the questioning of one's* patriotism* so to speak in this context. This has been a very dangerous political tool in suppressing the free exchange of ideas in the history of the American democracy. We don't need to suppress the friends we need to love and assist them. Aside from that, is the contentiousness that arises from believers frivolously bringing up so damning a point of view. Nothing more hurtful can be conceived from my point of view than imputing to another such behaviour. If it exists we should be sin-covering about it, IMHO. In the "The Memoirs of Haji Mirza Haydar�'Al�" he has written, "The Supreme Manifestation of God chastises the souls of sinners with the scourge of love and compassion, for their own edification. He conceals our mistakes and forgives us so that the wrong doer will receive divine education. In addition to that, His forgiving and merciful attitude to the people shows them by example the right path to tolerance and servitude."
As to the second point regarding catharsis, it is very important that safety and understanding be paramount, and sincere "real love" be shown in order that the friends can can undo within themselves the harm their hearts have felt. Catharsis is a healing technique that is only recently being understood and in my opinion was a method that the Master employed virtually every waking moment of his life. THE MORE LOVE WE SHOW THE LESS WORDS OF HURT THE FRIENDS WILL FEEL THEY NEED TO SPEAK. Catharisis simply won't work in an atmosphere where people are being condemned. If we encourage each other and love each other as Baha'u'llah and the Master has commanded us we will begin to see results, I believe, in the unification of the friends and in turn the fellow humans of this planet.
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 osborndo@pilot.msu.eduThu Mar 21 10:25:35 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 11:23:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Zhang Osborn
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Health & "No water?" during the Fast
Allah'u'Abha!
On this last day of the Fast, one quick question about the healthiness of
not drinking water during the daylight hours. During this fast, as in
previous ones, a number of the people to whom I explain the Fast seem to gasp
when I tell them we do not eat or drink between sunrise and sunset: "No
water??" Then there are sometimes questions about the healthiness of going 12
hours without taking in any liquids. Even some Baha'is wonder semi-quietly
about this aspect: "If it were just not eating, it wouldn't e so much of a
problem...." I never thought much about it (I just drink a healthy amount of
liquids before sunrise), but not having seen the question raised on the E-mail
fora, I thought I'd ask it aloud:
"Is there any evidence about negative (or positive) health effects or lack
of same of not drinking fluids during the day, in the course of `normal'
daily activities."
I realize that "normal daily activities" varies for a lot of reasons, and that
climate also affects the conditions one must deal with in observing the
physical aspects of the Fast. But I wonder if any research has been done on
this, since so many people, Muslim and Baha'i, fast in this way.
One anecdote and I'll close. When in Mali during Ramadan, another Peace
Corps volunteer in the town I worked in decided she wanted to observe the fast.
Not being Muslim however, she wouldn't do the prayers. Our Malian colleagues
(we worked for the same reforestation project) laughed good naturedly saying:
"If you don't pray, it doesn't do any good! Why go through the suffering?"
And since she believed (as many Americans apparently do) that not drinking
during the daytime would be unhealthy, she drank water. Our colleagues laughed
again good naturedly and said: "Well if you drink water, then it's EASY!!"*
Happy Naw Ruz to all!
Don Osborn osborndo@pilot.msu.edu
* This is not to make fun of this volunteer, who was keenly interested in many
aspects of the culture and worked well with this project. But I remember the
reaction of our colleagues to the notion of daytime drinking of water during
Ramadan every time the subject of drinking water during the daytime in the
Baha'i month of 'Ala' comes up.
From jwalbrid@indiana.eduThu Mar 21 10:28:19 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 11:33:36 -0500 (EST)
From: jwalbrid
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Lawh-i-Maqsud
For Sen's benefit, the Persian collection I refer to has the English
title "Tablets of Baha'u'llah Revealed after the Kitab-i-Aqdas" and the
Persian title "Majmu`i'i az Alwah-i Jamal-i Aqdas-i Abha kih Ba`d az
Kitab-i Aqdas Nazil Shudih." It is an exact Persian/Arabic counterpart
of the English *Tablets of Baha'u'llah* and is not a reprint of a book
published in the Middle East.

Now for Gordon McFarlane's questions on my analysis of Lawh-i-Maqsud:

I wrote . . .
>The passage on p. 171 "the high endeavors exerted by their rulers and the
>wise and learned among men" renders "az himmat-i awliya wa-hukama-yi
>ard". This translation is wrong: "Hukama," as above, is the usual late
>Persian term for "philosophers," so "wise and learned" is a reasonable
>but too general rendering. "Ard" is "earth" or "world," not "men."
Arguably, it is an acceptable loose rendering but a literal rendering
>would have done equally well. "Awliya," however, means "Sufi
>saints"--not "rulers,"--in this context. (It has a very wide range of
>meanings ranging from "imam" to "executor of a will.") . . . etc.

And Gordon responded:
>I'm not quite sure how a translation can be "wrong" and a "reasonable" and
>"acceptable loose rendering" at the same time. Are you suggesting that;
>"the zeal and energy born of mystical attainments, of their sufi saints,
>and philosophers of the earth." is a more literal and equally valid
>rendering than "the high endeavors exerted by their rulers and the wise and
>learned among men"?

Sorry. I am afraid I was not quite clear here. "Acceptable loose
rendering refers specifically to "men" instead of "earth" for "ard." The
main problem in this translation is that "awliya" means "saints" (in the
Islamic, not Christian sense), not "rulers": that is the part of the
translation that I think is simply wrong The use of two terms (himmat,
awliya) that do not have English equivalents and another (hukama) that
can be rendered in several ways make this difficult to translate. If you
wanted to render it preserving as well as possible that exact Persian
technical meanings, you would translate it as "through the spiritual
power of the mystical saints and philosophers of the earth." A less
technical rendering would be "through the efforts of the spiritual and
the wise." There are, I repeat, no rulers in the Persian. Gordon's
suggestion of "Please God, the peoples of the world may be led, as the
result of the high endeavors of those who carry the most clout in their
respective cultures, to recognize their best interests" is incorrect, I
think, because Baha'u'llah is specifying holy and wise people, not
powerful people, and is using well known technical terms to do so.
"Himmat" reinforces this narrower reading, since himmat is the spiritual
power exercised by the saints. It is, roughly speaking, what allows
Mother Theresa to get things done--the ability of holy people to affect
this world.

As for the question of whether the use of word-level interpretation
involves literalism, this is a fair question. Obviously, if you are
going to be a literalist, it is better to do so with the original than
with a translation. However, considering the mass of material written by
Baha'u'llah over forty years, often addressing very specific situations,
it is important to understand any given text in much larger contexts.

>>He seems to assume the underlying legitimacy of these groups
>>in society, (I agree ) but implicitly compares the clergy, philosophers,
>and mystics of Persia unfavorably with those of Europe ( I disagree. I find
>the tendency to read "implicit" comparisons into a text somewhat distasteful
>and ethnocentric, but I do agree that Baha'u'llah is admonishing the learned
>for" (1) occupying themselves totally with useless sciences; (2) hindering
>the laymen from accepting the new revelation; and (3) failing to concern
>themselves with the real needs of the people and nation.

I think the assumption of an implicit comparison with European scientists
and philosophers is reasonable, given the date of the tablet (ca. 1880, I
think). First, at this date the challenge of Europe on every
level--military, political, and intellectual--was the chief concern of
informed people in the Middle East at this time. Baha'u'llah had shown
that he was concerned with it. *Secret of Divine Civilization* (1875)
has the European challenge as its chief theme, and Baha'u'llah often
refers to Europe and its achievements, usually in favorable terms.
Baha'u'llah read the newspapers regularly, and they were filled not only
with European news but also with features on science, technology,
culture, etc. If Baha'u'llah is criticizing the `ulama (learned/clergy)
for engaging in sciences "that begin in mere words and end in mere
words," European technical achievements are lurking in the background of
the semantic field.

>1. How are references to mystics obscured? My understanding is that "The
>man of consummate learning" (pg 171) = the book learned, intellectual,
>scholar and the "sage endowed with penetrating wisdom" = the intuitive,
>inspired mystic.
>2. Please specify which "technical terms" are inconsistently rendered and
>render them consistent.

"hukamA": lit. :"the wise," but by this time a technical term for
philosophers. It or its singular form is rendered in TAB as "learned
doctors", "man of learning," the "wise and learned" The related term
"hikmat" is endered in TAB as "wisdom" and as "philosophy."

"`Alim," pl. "`ulamA": the normal Islamic word for Islamic clergy,
literally "the learned." Usually translated in Baha'i texts as "clerics"
or "divines". Here rendered as the "learned","sage"

"AwliyA", which has a variety of meanings in Arabic, including
"guardian". Here it seems from the context to refer to mystics.
Rendered in TAB as "rulers."

"`urafA": lit. "knowers." Another word for "mystics." In TAB: "wise men".

This is from checking three passages only. You will have to take my word
about the normal meaning of these Persian words and thus the
appropriateness of the published translations, but I think this is
sufficient to show the inconsistency of the renderings of these terms.

"Elitest view of the issue": By this I meant that the text supports the
view that Baha'u'llah saw philosophers, scholars of other sorts, and
mystics as (a) legimate classes (b) with peculiar responsibilities in
society (c) based on their exceptional attainments.

john walbridge
From HAI.ISKANDAR@forum.va.govThu Mar 21 10:29:09 1996
Date: 20 Mar 96 12:22 EST
From: HAI.ISKANDAR@forum.va.gov
To: HAI.ISKANDAR@forum.va.gov, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Naw-Ruz
As we are about to embark on the ninth wAhid of the first kull-i-shay' of
the Baha'i Dispensation which will witness the Lesser Peace and the 200th
anniversaries of the births of The Blessed Bab and of BahA'u'llAh in the
years 1435 and 1433AH (lunar), I dream of a Third Baha'i World Congress in
either Shiraz or TihrAn to commemorate either one; else we would have to
wait for the tenth wAhid when we can celebrate them in either November
2017 or October 2019.
Most joyous Naw-Ruz greetings to everyone!
Iskandar Hai
From alma@indirect.comThu Mar 21 10:29:57 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 10:37:11 -0700
From: Alma Engels
To: "Richard C. Logan"
Cc: Talisman
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]
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.
First of all in regard to Talisman. The following is a quote from a message
the list owner posts from time to time:
>5. The list owner being a Midwesterner of philosophic temperament,
>participants are requested to refrain from abusive language, discourtesy, ad
>hominem arguments, accusations of heresy, and other forms of fallacious
>argumentation.
It seems to me that Covenantal questions are included here under
"accusations of heresy". Now Talisman is a list for Baha'i interests. But
it is a secular list and not a Baha'i one. Does a Baha'i who is voluntarily
here have the right to override the apparent wishes of the list owner? Or
should that Baha'i if s/he is disturbed by what seems to her/him to be
questionable in regards to the Covenant simply remain publicly quiet or
resign from the list? Or perhaps that person could phrase his/her concerns
in a manner which does not question the firmness of the faith of the
original poster. In other words do we have the right to mold a list to our
own desires.
More generally I am concerned that the letter from the House seems to place
the onus of proving ones 'orthodoxy' on the person making what seems to
someone a questionable statement. One must prove ones innocence rather than
having another prove one's quilt. This disturbs me greatly for a number of
reasons.
The first is this side tracks the original discussion and replaces it with
an irrelevant one and often the group's energies are diverted. And this MAY
be the intent of the questioning in the first place.
Secondly I wonder how one proves ones firmness in the Covenant any more than
how one can prove that one has stopped beating one's wife when in fact the
person never was beating his wife (or her husband -- this being the Faith of
equality of men and women. ;-) ).
Thirdly, I think that questioning one's firmness in the Covenant is
sometimes used (and I don't mean to imply that this is the case on Talisman)
to silence someone or at least make that person cease presenting
controversial points of view.
Fourthly, this sort of questioning tends to make the group more cautious in
a visible manner in statements in that many then seem to see a necessity of
affirming respect for the Institutions, firmness in the Covenant, etc.,
explicitely rather than allowing it to be assumed that this is the case
because that person is a declared Baha'i who gives all appearances of living
a Baha'i life to the best of his/her ability.
And finally and most importantly, such questioning of the "Baha'iness" of
another believer is all to often brought to the attention of some portion of
the Administrative Order for action by the Administrative Order. And many
times it is a frivilous charge which will not hold up. I speak from
experience here for such happened to me late summer of last year. And the
effect can be devastating even when in the end one is cleared as I was.
Moreover, when this happens because of email, the conveying of the charges
may not be done discretely. In my case it involved subjecting me to the
inspection of people in Florida before the charges reached my LSA and ABM
for Protection in Arizona. Since I had no way of retracing the route to
Florida, my reputation there is probably still compromised. It is true that
we must face tests and that we grow them -- I have changed -- but where
does it say that Baha'is should be the deliberate source of tests for other
Baha'is?
This might not be so important if it were a rare happening in the Baha'i
community -- at least the American one. But it is not. I am constantly
amazed when I find a fellow Baha'i who has had a similar exerience. The
latest occurence was when I forwarded David Langness' letter to someone who
had been on Talisman until recently and was aware of David's retraction. I
wanted him/her to have a complete picture. And found when this person
replied to me that she/he had also been tested by someone in the AO.
In peace,
Alma
At 09:00 AM 3/20/96 -0600, Richard C. Logan wrote:
>> Nor may there be any solution to Covenantally
>>questionable comments (and I take an earlier message from the House
>>of Justice to give us permission to raise the Covenantal issue). I
>>was hoping the chance to speak one's insecurities would allow people
>>to release them cathartically. In some cases the result has been the
>>opposite; insecurities encourage each other.
>
>Dearest Friends,
>
>A person can certainly bring up the question of the covenant and in the
most humble and evanescent manner bring to the attention of a friend their
point of view. But one must be extremely cautious concerning the words of
the House before taking that statement as a greenlight for "excessive speech".
>
> What concerns, and I think rightly, members of this list, is the
questioning of one's* patriotism* so to speak in this context. This has
been a very dangerous political tool in suppressing the free exchange of
ideas in the history of the American democracy. We don't need to suppress
the friends we need to love and assist them. Aside from that, is the
contentiousness that arises from believers frivolously bringing up so
damning a point of view. Nothing more hurtful can be conceived from my
point of view than imputing to another such behaviour. If it exists we
should be sin-covering about it, IMHO. In the "The Memoirs of Haji Mirza
Haydar�'Al�" he has written, "The Supreme Manifestation of God chastises
the souls of sinners with the scourge of love and compassion, for their own
edification. He conceals our mistakes and forgives us so that the wrong
doer will receive divine education. In addition to that, His forgiving and
merciful attitude to the people shows them by example the right path to
tolerance and servitude."
>
>As to the second point regarding catharsis, it is very important that
safety and understanding be paramount, and sincere "real love" be shown in
order that the friends can can undo within themselves the harm their hearts
have felt. Catharsis is a healing technique that is only recently being
understood and in my opinion was a method that the Master employed virtually
every waking moment of his life. THE MORE LOVE WE SHOW THE LESS WORDS OF
HURT THE FRIENDS WILL FEEL THEY NEED TO SPEAK. Catharisis simply won't work
in an atmosphere where people are being condemned. If we encourage each
other and love each other as Baha'u'llah and the Master has commanded us we
will begin to see results, I believe, in the unification of the friends and
in turn the fellow humans of this planet.
>
>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
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
>
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)

}

Return to Talisman

Translation Page

Baha'i Studies Page

J. Cole Home Page

Last Updated 12-22-96 WebMaster: Juan R.I. Cole jrcole@umich.edu

Last Updated 12-22-96
WebMaster: Juan R.I. Cole
jrcole@umich.edu