Talisman Bahai Archives Dec. 17-18, 1995
Dec. 17-18, 1995
Talisman posts received 12/16/95-12/17/95
--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 07:16:19+030
To: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
From: dpeden@imul.com (Don Peden)
Subject: Re: Conscience
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
>On Fri, 15 Dec 1995, Don Peden wrote:
>
>> Would this mean that Gandhi's approach of passive non-obedience was an
>> anarchists approach? If it was, let's hear it for the anarchists (I always
>> suspected they had a role to play!)
>
>Well, having an intimate knowledge of the subject, I recall that there
>were some loose connections between the War Resisters I used to hang
>around with, (I used to be Anarchy-Boy in an earlier incarnation) and
>various anarchist groups. Sure, the moral posture is a good one, with
>respect to treatment of one's fellow human beings. But this leaves out
>the no less important ethic of supporting the government.
Thanks for your reply. It was helpful to clarify my understanding
of what you were saying. It seems, however, that the above query and
response has awakened many old ideas and emotions from our fellow peaceniks.
In the discussion of anarchy/government, I would propose that there is a
difference between Gandhi and M.L.King and the anarchists in Spain (just as
an example). The difference was that one used passive resistance, and the
other used violence as a means of accomplishing their end.
When it comes to passive resistance, (which is really what we are
discussing with reference to an individual's inability to follow a directive
which they feel is contrary to moral conscience), it is very hard to have a
catagorical answer...all cases are different...and one walks on very tricky
ground, such as the issue of Germany. We are also distinguishing between
moral obligation of obedience to Baha'u'llah's directive to obey just
governments, and the obligation to be obedient to the House of Justice. Is
the House of Justice a just government, or is it something else? A key word
which, perhaps, bears some exploration is "just". It seems that you have
had some dialogue on this issue with the world centre, and I would be very
interested in hearing what the Universal House of Justice responded. I
don't know if this is old territory on Talisman or not, and if it is,
perhaps a private posting would be appropriate to continue on.
Thanks again for your response,
Love,
Bev.
=END=
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 1995 23:31:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: publishing statistics
Paul Johnson's analysis of published books per capita contains an
important truth, however you look at it. The OCLC database represents a
good indication of what is available to the public, at least, and the
Baha'is are weird in this regard even compared to sectarian or esoteric
movements that began in the 19th century.
It is simply not true that the series *Studies in Babi and Baha'i
History/Religions* has sold badly. The fact is that whereas few academic
books can hope nowadays to sell more than about 500 copies (that is,
monographs published by e.g. Princeton University Press or U of Cal.
Press), there is a market of about 1,000 Baha'i households for pretty
much any serious book about the Faith. Since it costs $20,000-$30,000 to
publish academic books, and since they can be priced around $30, you can
see that it is possible to publish such books and to break even or make a
small profit.
My translations of Mirza Abu'l-Fadl's books must have sold in the
thousands by now, by the way (does Tony know?)
So, the drawback is not financial, or not primarily so. I personally
think it is ideological. The Baha'i community simply is not on the whole
very welcoming of individual insights, demanding conformity and
centralizing everything in the hands of elected bureaucrats, most of whom
are not themselves intellectuals. The covenant is frequently brandished
about as some sort of threat or control mechanism.
The system provides serious disincentives to authors. First of all, why
spend years writing a book that could be turned down in the final
analysis by a Review committee? This has happened to a number of Baha'i
authors over the years, though not so much in this country; the
derailment of the Encyclopaedia is a good example.
Nor is everything that goes on in this regard through official channels.
Last year a Baha'i academic with a Ph.D. in the social sciences had an
introductory book on the Faith submitted for review in a European
country. The Review committee contacted an individual member of the
House about it. That House member objected to a number of aspects of the
book, though he is not himself an academic. It took some doing to
convince the Reviewing committee that all this was improper and that the
book should be allowed to appear as was. Most authors are simply not
willing to put up with these sorts of hassles. We have lost at least two
Baha'i magazines because of similar hassles.
This situation, as Paul's statistics indicate, is abnormal and
intellectually unhealthy.
As for the Covenant, can we please listen for once to the Centre of the
Covenant?
At the Central Congregational Church in Brooklyn on 16 June 1912, `Abdu'l-
Baha said: "Just as in the world of politics there is need for free thought,
likewise in the world of religion there should be the right of
unrestricted individual belief. Consider what a vast difference exists
between modern democracy and the old forms of despotism. Under an
autocratic government the opinions of men are not free, and
development is stifled, whereas in a democracy, because thought and
speech are not restricted, the greatest progress is witnessed. It is
likewise true in the world of religion. When freedom of conscience,
liberty of thought and right of speech prevail--that is to say, when
every man according to his own idealization may give expression to his
beliefs--development and growth are inevitable." At the Universalist
Church Washington, D.C. on 6 Nov. 1912, he said: "Praise be to
God! The standard of liberty is held aloft in this land. You enjoy
political liberty; you enjoy liberty of thought and speech, religious
liberty, racial and personal liberty."
Surely we want the "inevitable" "development and growth" of the Baha'i
Faith? And if we do, the Master has told us exactly how we can ensure
it. We are nearly 40 years into the post-Guardian era, the Faith has
emerged from obscurity, and it is time now to move away from spoon-fed
baby food and toward something of more intellectual substance, toward a
recognition of the individual right of individual interpretation and a
recognition of the inevitable (and desirable) diversity of thought in a
global Faith. Our profound loyalty to the Institutions, for whom some on
Talisman have put their lives at risk in the past, is not a reason to
deprive them of the sort of perspectives and consultation that
free-wheeling discussion alone can provide.
Let us not question one another's motives. After all, it would be as easy
to speak of Baha'i "careerists" who attempt to parlay a rhetoric of
super-loyalty into a high standing in the community as it would be to
speak of selfish Western (is that a racial slur?) intellectuals motivated
by ego rather than the best interests of the Faith. The goal for all
Baha'is on Talisman is the same, to see an efflorescence of the
community. Only if such an efflorescence were already visible would it
be illegitimate to discuss the necessary changes to bring it about. In
fact, of course, Baha'is are culturally impoverished and intellectually
deprived, and I personally believe this gap has made it difficult for the
community to grow in a literate society such as the U.S. (and even moreso
in places such as France, where our numbers are pitiful).
cheers Juan Cole, Dept. of History, University of Michigan
=END=
From: "QUANTA DAWNLIGHT"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 1995 23:42:32 EST
Subject: Re: QUANTA'S HOME PAGE
Dearly beloved Talismanistas,
Some of you send me e-mail and taking my offer for posting your
pictures as 'Quanta's Talismanian Friends'on the www.home page. I am
very serious about this. I will put your picture, or group picture
some of you took at those conferences, if you send
me one ASAP. Put your name and the date in the back and mail it with
permission to:
Quanta Dawn-Light
809 Tower Street
Raleigh, N.C. 27607-7364
My home phone (919) 833-2452 best time to reach me is late eves or
early mornings. Or, leave a message.
p.s. This weekend I will be adding some more stuff on the home page,
including a chanting of a prayer and reading poetry, if you have
access to multimedia audio equipment, you'll hear Quanta!
Also if John & Linda Walbridge wishes me to I will write a few
introductory lines about my beloved Talisland too. Love y'all.
Thank you God, I needed some pleasant distractions from hoh humm!
I am studying for taking an exam for a job position, so when I am done
I'll be back in full swing my dearest, much missed Talismafriends.
with much love and best wishes,
*** ***
* *
*
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 12:05:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Timothy A. Nolan"
To: 72110.2126@compuserve.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Conscience
David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com> writes:
> First, the comment, on Tim Nolan's post of yesterday -- Tim, you
> say that "there have to be limits on civil disobedience. Not all
> disobeyers have the noble principles of a Gandhi or M.L. King.
> Some who practice civil disobedience are simply terrorists or
> murderers."
>
dl> I would submit that civil disobedience has a long and powerful
dl> history *because* it has disavowed terrorism and murder.
I certainly agree that non-violent civil disobedience has a history
to be proud of. Unfortunately, not all disobedience is that noble.
Surely it is obvious that there are terrorists and murderers who
are not merely common criminals. Some horrible actions have been
carried out in the name of resisting a government that someone sees
as unjust. In my view, this is really about *principles*.
If we accept the *principle* that it is morally right sometimes to
disobey the law in order to follow what our consciences tell us
is a higher good,....once that *principle* is established, then it
becomes necessary to define clearly what is "moral" and what is
a "higher good". The man who recently murdered the prime minister
of Israel apparently thought he was serving a "higher good".
So, the fundamental question, which will always pester us until
it is answered, is, "Who gets to define what is a 'higher good'"
What one person may think is a just cause for disobeying a law, you may
see as narrow mindedness, paranoia, or a simple lust for vengeful
bloodletting. Who gets to define the circumstances under which civil
disobedience is justified or not justified, and who gets to decide
what acts of disobedience are permissible? I think it is important
to face up to the reality that not everyone is noble minded. Some
people are capable of morally horrific acts, which they call
"civil disobedience" or "freedom fighting". There are many people
who disobey laws, and most of them are not Gandhi or Thoreau.
The existence of the Universal House of Justice makes this
moral dilemma go away. Since the decisions of the House of Justice
are "the truth and the purpose of God Himself", since that body
is "the source of all good and freed from all error" therefore
it follows that there can never be a circumstance when moral principle
will be better served by disobeying the House to follow one's
individual conscience. Following one's conscience may make a person
feel better, but disobeying the truth and the purpose of God Himself
obviously can never be morally right. The voice an individual hears
as his or her conscience is not guaranteed unerring divine guidance;
the House of Justice is guaranteed exactly this.
dl> To lump nonviolent civil disobedience and criminal or genocidal
dl> acts together makes a serious category error.
Oh, I agree with you completely. The point is there ARE people who
make exactly this error. There are people who kill and terrorize
and call it civil disobedience. What should be done about them?
Should people be allowed civil disobedience only if they have
the "right" kind of conscience? If yes, who gets to define
what the "right" kind of conscience is?
dl> The presence of the Universal House of Justice, and their rulings
dl> on various Baha'i laws, helps immeasurably in but does not replace
dl> the operation of the individual conscience.
I agree. In a letter about chastity, published back in 1969, the
Universal House of Justice wrote to the effect that one cannot
be a good Baha'i by merely following a list of rules. The House of
Justice went on to say that it is not possible AND NOT DESIREABLE
for the Universal House of Justice to make rules to tell us precisely
what to do in any possible situation. Instead, the House wrote,
a Baha'i should perform every conscious act in the spirit of service
to God. If a person follows this principle, the House said, he or she
will not fail to realize the true purpose of his or her life.
Tim Nolan
=END=
From: cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca (Christopher Buck)
Subject: Re: Zuhuru'l-Haqq -- part 1
To: rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.com (Ahang Rabbani)
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 0:58:59 EST
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Dear Ahang: 16 December 1995
Yours is the clearest picture I've seen on Zuhur al-Haqq. I look
forward to further posts on this monumental work. I am particularly
interested in any information on Baha'u'llah that is not contained in
Nabil (if this is at all possible to determine).
But I have a more general question. I would like to draw an
analogy between the Tehran *House of Justice* (is this accurate? or
anachronistic?), the commissioning of Zuhur al-Haqq and the Baha'i
Encyclopedia Project and its commissioning by the US-NSA/UHJ.
One major difference is that, from what I gather, the Baha'i
Encyclopedia Project is not dead. Comatose, perhaps, but not dead. Zuhur
al-Haqq, however, suffered much more severe vicissitudes. This
historically-encyclopedic project has been dead for decades. The only hope
for it is a physical resurrection.
Despite the fact that *Jinab-i Fadil* was one of the only two
*fully-confirmed Baha'is* whom the beloved Master sent to America (the
other being Mirza Abu'l-Fadl) and despite Fadil's secret rank as a Hand of
the Cause of God, it appears to me that his scholarship was vigorously
opposed by certain powerful influences in Baha'i administration.
Perhaps you might enlarge on this, Ahang. It is a delicate subject
and it is not my intention to scandalize the Administration in Tehran. But
the tensions generated between scholarship and Administration ought to
stand as an object lesson in history.
No one would ever doubt or impugn Fadil's fidelity to the
Covenant. So why was publication of Zuhur al-Haqq opposed? What were the
issues involved?
Once again, Ahang, I am interested in the issues and not in
criticizing the Institutions of the time. I just want your thoughts as to
whether or not Baha'i history is repeating itself in the Baha'i
Encyclopedia Project. I would hope that my analogy does not hold, and that
things have really come quite a long way since then.
If the Baha'i Encyclopedia does get published, which I have faith it
will, will Zuhur al-Haqq as well?
-- Christopher Buck
**********************************************************************
* * * * * *
* * * Christopher Buck Invenire ducere est.
* * * Carleton University * * *
* * * Internet: CBuck@CCS.Carleton.CA * * *
* * * P O Box 77077 * Ottawa, Ontario * K1S 5N2 Canada * * *
* * * * * *
**********************************************************************
=END=
From: Don_R._Calkins@commonlink.com (Don R. Calkins)
To: think@ucla.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Interesting info
Date: 16 Dec 1995 00:13:07 GMT
This is a reference to the 'our' Mason Remey.
Actually there were 3 complete sets of his materials in the state. One went
to a public library in S E Iowa, don't remember where just now. Iowa
received some of the most complete sets that he sent out because of the
connection of the Mason family (his mother's maiden name) to Iowa. As I
remember, he was born in Iowa, but left at a very early age. His mother's
father was the first Federal Judge in the state, and is considered somewhat
important in the judicial history of the era because of some of his
decisions. Other compete or nearly complete sets were given to Wisconsin
(?), because of his father's family roots, and the District of Columbia (?)
because of the family's involvement in the government and navy.
The issue of the box was first popularized during the move from the old State
Library to the new Historical Building because it was rather difficult to
move. Then when it was opened, several of the local TV stations were on
hand. There was mention of the Faith in connection with it, but he usually
came off sounding like an egotistical nut.
Don C
- sent via an evaluation copy of BulkRate (unregistered).
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 21:09:29 +1300 (NZDT)
To: SFotos@eworld.com, talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: Re: Darwinism and the Writings
Sandy wrote,
>Some Baha'i friends in the natural sciences (and me too, since I have a
>background in maine botany )have felt that this statement refers to
>potentiality rather than to morphology.
>
>The particular line which would eventually evolve into humans was always
>distinct and identifiable in terms of its future direction, although not in
>terms of its physical appearance vis a vis other organisms.
>
>Again, may I argue for the longitudinal perspective?
Why not? Religions and the best philosophical systems are inevitably
teleological. But just as the deathless human soul comes into existence at
conception, even when humans were rather amoebic in appearance they were
nonethless essentially separated from all other creatures through their
investment with what 'Abdu'l-Baha calls an ideal endowment. Which -- as
you indicate -- expresses itself only progressively, through unfoldment...
Which is to say, I suppose, that our amoebic thru ape-like forbears will be
present in the next world fully invested with *human* beauty.... As will
aborted foetuses...
Robert (a small black dog with springy step) Johnston
=END=
Date: 16 Dec 95 00:38:15 U
From: "Dan Orey"
Subject: my fuzzy post
To: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz, talisman@indiana.edu
Reply to: my fuzzy post
Good question - First the Guardian - I think he said something about not being
an authority on things that are scientific...... science seems to be saying
something different these days. I do not think it takes anything away from what
he says, its in the application.
Northern California sets the standards, for fine whine, freeways, pollution,
both high and low academic standards in our public schools, great weather, some
of the finest scenery in the world, Mt. Shasta, hippies, right wing
fundamenatlists, left wing fundamentalists, Berkeley, technology, art, culture,
smog, fog, a sense that there is a contribution that can be made by everyone in
a society no matter who thery are - the sense gets written into things like
constitutions, human rights, Easelen, affirmative action statements here, Mrs.
Doubtfire, computers, tall trees, Pete's Coffee, great t-shirts, good pizza,
the biggest long distance race in the world (Bay to Breakers 150 000 and no
crime), the most beautiful city in the world (San Francisco is well, ok, one of
them), were only $29.00 away from Disneyland, multiethnic junkfood (I had a
salmon burrito today)...... oh yeah gay rights.
Admittedly not all of these standards are those that should be adopted by
everyone, its just a cool place that a lot of people move to from all over the
world. I think the same can be said about about a hundred thousand other palces
on the planet. - Daniel (not meaning to be a cultural snob)
=END=
From: "Mark A. Foster"
Subject: epiphanies & reverence
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 07:50:06 -0600 (CST)
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Hi, Eric -
You're welcome, Eric. Sorry for taking so long to get back to you.
My Internet provider was down for a little over a day, and I am trying
to gradually get caught up on my mail which had build up to 187 messages!
P>Mark, you know it is probably ok for you to say you are pissed when
P>people make snide comments about why you are still not married, and it
P>is probably also ok to say you are frustrated with something about the
P>discussion here. Let it out, it's better than letting it fester. You
P>are a great guy, I really appreciate what you have contributed.
Thank you, brother Eric ;-). Actually, these sorts of statements do
not bother me. In the case you are referring to, I think that the poster
was well-intentioned and was speaking out of a sincere concern. At
*other times*, however (not in the situation you are referring to here
in cyberspace), I have had people try to convince me that I *should* get
married. Some have even produced Baha'i texts, out of context IMO, to
support their contention. I tend to take such statements, however
inappropriate, as expressions of where the "other guy" is coming from.
I try not to judge these people. What they say honestly does not bother
me. OTOH, direct, personal name-calling can, as you know, stir me up.
However, recognizing that weakness in myself, I have of late been doing
some inner work so that, hopefully, I can, if appropriate, mention my
displeasure without *reacting* to that either.
P>I don't know if I should be AWED by Mark, Tim and Robert's reverence/faith
P>in the infallability/sinlessness (or whatever term you like) of the House
P>of Justice, or HORRIFIED by the possibility that because of that faith,
P>they would seem to be willing to give up their responsibility to protect
P>a friend's life under the hypothetical circumstances that we have been
P>discussing.
Speaking only for myself, my feeling is that the Bab and Baha'u'llah
also wish the highest for God's servants, and I trust that, as They
guide the Supreme Body in its deliberations, its members will come to a
decision which will be for the best of all concerned - even though
neither myself nor my friend may understand the wisdom involved.
Warm greetings to you,
Mark
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion *
*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* Structuralists Know the Lingo ;-)
=END=
From: "Mark A. Foster"
Subject: miscellaneous
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 07:50:07 -0600 (CST)
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Hannah, Dan, Terry, and other Talismanians -
Hannah, I appreciated your message. Personally, I do not feel that
people are playing games, but I think that we are all aware of one or
more ideological gulfs on Talisman, and some folks are trying to
understand those who have a different view of things than they do.
I am also saddened by the AOL problem. Certainly, the National
Center should be informed. If Rob Stockman has been reading these
messages, perhaps he could, with Dan's consent, relay this information
to the secretary's office (unless, of course, they are already aware of
it).
Since I am one of two supervisory AOL Baha'i staff, I will take it
upon myself to discreetly inquire further into this matter. However, I
am the chief Baha'i chat host (with my two assistants). It is the other
administrator who is responsible for the message board. Fortunately, we
have not seen any comparable rudeness on the Front Porch (the religion
and ethics chat area).
Dan, if you need the screen name of the Baha'i message board host, I
can email it to you privately.
Terry, I enjoyed reading about your teaching efforts among the Jews.
As someone who comes from a Jewish background, I have always wished that
there were some way to formally promote such teaching efforts without
endangering the special relationship that Baha'is have with the nation
of Israel.
Fortunately, there is a great deal of universalism in some sectors
of the Jewish community. For example, ALEPH, the major organization
devoted to Jewish renewal (which I am a member of - since one need not
have Judaism as one's formal religion in order to join), has been
working on returning spiritual vitality to the Jewish community. Its
founder is Reb Zalman Schachter-Shalomi, a former Lubavicher rabbi, who
now, by his own admission (in the book _Paradigm Shift_), is trying to
do the same thing for Judaism as Matthew Fox has for Roman Catholicism
(now, of course, Anglo-Catholicism). Like Fox, Reb Zalman (as he is
known) refers to eco-spirituality and calls the earth by its Greek name,
gaia (with all its wonderfully neo-pagan connotations).
I wonder if Jewish renewal and ALEPH could be a "thought bridge" to
reach out to these people - to find a common focus? As an aside, I
personally feel that the late Marian Lippitt and Foundation for the
Science of Reality may have a *similar*, though not identical, function
within the Baha'i community as Fox's Institute for Creation Spirituality
is having within Christianity and Reb Zalman's ALEPH is having within
Judaism.
Bright blessings,
Mark
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion *
*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* Structuralists Know the Lingo ;-)
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 05:41:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Zuhur'l-Haqq and Encyclopedia
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Once again through sheer brilliance, Chris Buck has managed to cut
through all the smoke and put his finger right on the heart of the
issues -- the short answer is: yes, there are a lot of
similarities between what happened to Zuhuru'l-Haqq and the
current status of the Baha'i Encyclopedia.
Let me first state what I know as to what happened with
Zuhuru'l-Haqq project. The lessons may then be obvious.
On 11 Jalal 107 BE (1951) the NSA of Iran (Ali-Akbar Furutan was
NSA secretary) published a 16 page open letter which at the end
contains a short response by Fadil. This letter was the kiss of
death for both Zuhurh'l-Haqq series and Fadil's scholarship and
reputation. He spent the latter part of his life away from the
Baha'i community -- though extremely active in teaching field.
After the passing of his wife, he married a Muslim woman and his
three sons were raised with deep resentments towards the Baha'i
community in general -- though they are very knowledgeable about
the Cause and have many good Baha'i friends. His youngest son
lives here in Houston, another passed away (in Ohio?) with the
eldest (he is about 80 years old now) being in the States now
seeking medical treatment (heart problem).
Of most concern is that Fadil had some extremely valuable and
*unique* Texts and documents in his possessions, not to mention
the fact that he had completed a number of very important books on
the Faith which I believe he never shared with the administration
and left with his sons -- which either have all been destroyed or
awaits freezing of hell before they are handed over to the Faith.
As an example of some of the books which he has completed but you
never hear anyone mentioning it is a massive Encyclopedia on the
Cause under the title "Asraru'l-Athar-i Umumi" (General Mysteries
of the Writings). Years earlier he published a 5-volume Baha'i
encyclopedia series titled "Asraru'l-Athar-i Khususi" (Specific
Mysteries of the Writings) which no serious Baha'i student should
be without. But his "Umumi" version was apparently the finest
single piece of scholarship ever attempted in the Cause and its a
great shame if destroyed -- or never published.
But again, what is of greatest importance is the massive amount of
Tablets and original documents which he had in his possession
which never found their way to the Cause. Some time ago, when I
was posting on Quddus (I believe my first post on this topic), I
discussed that for example he had a Tablet of Baha'u'llah in his
possession where He states that had the Bab not declared, then
Quddus would have. (Dr. Muhammad Afnan in Andalib states there is
not such Tablet, but I think he knows better.)
Anyway, the question is what happened with this most productive
Baha'i scholar of all time (in my view, several orders of
magnitude above Mirza Abu'l-Fadl or anyone else in the Faith)?
The answer to this question is with "the Dawnbreakers"!
All roads eventually lead to "The Dawnbreakers" which the beloved
Guardian has stated is the "standard for Baha'i history", but in
reality has served as the standard for Baha'i fundamentalism.
"The Dawnbreakers" in my view is the biggest barrier to Baha'i
scholarship! In fact, one can trace back the emergence of Baha'i
fundamentalism right to the publication of this book and then
exaggerated statements about it being "THE STANDARD".
And that's when Fadil's troubles began.
Fadil's view of history was based on several decades of
incomparable collection of Texts, documents, narratives,
interviews with old believers and extensive travels throughout the
region -- not to mentioned a very elevated sense of devotion to
the Cause which both Abdu'l-Baha and the beloved Guardian have
praised repeatedly.
So, what happened?
Fadil had completed his first 3 volumes when Ali-Akbar Furutan got
all bent out of shape. Now Furutan was (and is) somewhat of
intellectual lightweight (and I'm afraid history won't be very
kind to him on his writings, unless the House send out (which they
will!) an extremely glowing cable after his death to silence all
his critics (which are many)).
This is all in early 1930's. So, Furutan, knowing that he
couldn't take on a great mind like Fadil, got together with a real
intellectual superstar (well, fast becoming one in those days),
namely, my other hero, Ishraq-Khavari. Together they made a case
that certain points in Zuhuru'l-Haqq series do not conform to The
Dawnbreaker -- the "standard"! So, they write to the Guardian.
This makes Shoghi Effendi all upset with Zuhuru'l-Haqq as he
didn't like anything that deviated by a dot from the Dawnbreakers.
So on 15 September 1932, he writes (my inadequate translation):
"Immediately organize a special committee to investigate,
reorganize and bring into conformity Jinab-i Fadil's history
with that of Nabil's history [the Dawnbreakers]. Of this
task and grave responsibility, no delay is permitted, and
utmost effort must be diligently exerted."
Poor Fadil. After a letter like this from the Guardian, well,
his goose was cooked.
What happened next is the ugliest chapter in Baha'i scholarship
which has ever occurred. If you think things are bad now with
respect to scholarship, well, you ain't seen nothing.
(I have no intention of discussing the details on Talisman, and
if pressed, will move the conversation over to Tarjuman, but in
truth really rather not disclose any details, mostly because
there is no guarantee that what I know is really what happened.
Remember, I'm just a young lad in my 30's, I wasn't around in
those days.)
What is a matter of public record and I can safely state is that
a committee was organized and closely (word by word) examined
Zuhuru'l-Haqq. Now the Guardian wanted this to be done
overnight. Well it took nearly 20 years to complete this process
(Fadil's "confessional" letter is dated 1951). So, those hoping
for a quick resolution of Baha'i Encyclopedia impasse may wish to
make note of this.
At the end, as I said, NSA of Iran published a 16 page letter
outlining all the "errors" in ZH-3 and included Fadil's own short
letter giving a blanket agreement with their comments.
This letter of NSA of Iran is the greatest stupidity ever
committed by a Baha'i institution and shows only their depth of
ignorance. I will share its content as our discussion of ZH-3
unfolds.
This letter resulted in discouraging a model servant of the Faith
from further association with Baha'i administration and silenced
anyone who dared to do serious or independent scholarship.
Forever though the memory of this illustrious scholar of the
Cause is inscribed upon the hearts of those seeking knowledge.
The incredible injustice that took place a half-century ago must
be set right, and it is my intention to speak publicly, openly
and supportive of the Hand of the Cause of God Fadil-i
Mazandarani wherever I can. If justice means anything to you, I
implore you to do likewise.
With devotion to the Faith, ahang.
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 09:35:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonah Winters
To: Member1700@aol.com, talisman
Subject: Review / Provisional Translations
Dear Tony,
I am asking you this question via Talisman in case others are
curious, too. Recently, someone (I apologize for forgetting who) broke
down into a few specific categories the reasons that review would reject
a text, one of which was the use of provisional translations. Yet, in
SBBR Vol. 5, Lambden's "Sinaitic Mysteries" is full of provisional
translations. I quote footnote 62, p. 166: "Unless otherwise indicated
all translations from Persian and Arabic sources are my own." How was
this possible? And, I'm not sure about this, but didn't Lawson also
translate some of his quotations of the Bab's works in the first essay
himself?
-Jonah
PS- If anyone reading this note has not read the book, let me encourage
you to do so. It is, along with Chris's volume, one of the very best
academic books on the Faith yet produced. We owe great thanks to Kalimat
for producing such fine work!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jonah and Kari Winters
33 Endean Avenue / Toronto, Ontario / M4M-1W5 / (416) 461-3527
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 10:02:02 EWT
From: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: Review and translation
To: talisman@indiana.edu
One of the reasons that I have written virtually nothing for publication
on the Faith (apart from a great many unpublished encyclopedia
articles) is that it is virtually impossible to write anything substantive
about Baha'i thought without doing translations. For example, my
own academic speciality is Islamic philosophy, which sheds great
light on Baha'i texts like *Some Answered Questions*, but even
when such texts are translated, the translations are not suitable for
the kind of technical use I would wish to make up them. Nima
can explain why, for instance, I could not use the chapter in
SAQ that translates "wahdat al-wujud" as "pantheism". It is not
that there is anything wrong with the translations; it is just that
a translation made for devotional use is probably not going to be
usable for theological analysis. The rules have loosened in recent
years, so that people now talk about "provisional translations" or
"paraphrases," but the situation is still not very satisfactory.
There is a larger problem here, in fact. A field like Baha'i studies
is comparable to fields like the classics, Egyptology, or Islamic studies.
Such fields develop in a logical way, the first step being to make
sources available. That means that we now ought to be concentrating
on publishing primary texts, translating, cataloging, etc. Apart from
the systematic cataloging of primary texts being done in the Holy
Land (which are generally not available to scholars) and the American Baha'i
archives, the rules about review and translation have made such
activity very difficult. We have no critical edition of any work of
Baha'i scripture; the only full editions and translations of any Babi works
have been done by Azalis and non-Baha'is respectively. None of the
primary sources for the life of Baha'u'llah have been published. Such
limitations discourage scholars, Baha'i and non-Baha'i, from seriously
pursuing the field. After all, to do a critical edition (for non-specialists,
a "critical edition" is an edition of a text that uses as many manuscripts
as possible to produce a reliable version of the text) of, say, Qayyumu'l-
Asma', the first major work of the Bab, would take a scholar two to
four years. It would be a worthy project, but no one is going to
undertake it unless he is reasonably sure that he can publish it without
interference. The real cost of fiascos like the Salmani affair and the
Baha'i Encyclopedia is that they discourage scholars from involving
themselves in such projects, even if they actually are commissioned
or pre-approved by Baha'i institutions.
john walbridge
=END=
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 15:58:11 +0100 (MET)
Subject: homosexuality
To: talisman@indiana.edu
John (W),
Just to say I appreciated your posting
regarding the 'legalisation' of homosexual
marriages. Perhaps some less formal type
of modus vivendi might be more practically
realizable at present. Such as a statement to the
effect that there is no reason why the Baha'i
community should concern itself with the sexual
relations or abstinence, as the case may be, of
people living together, whether or not they have
formally undertaken a civil marriage (which is legally
recognized for homosexuals in the Netherlands, as I
understand it). But on the other hand, it might be
considered inappropriate at present to apply other aspects
of Baha'i law, such as the dowry and parental permission.
Politics is the art of the possible
Sen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen McGlinn ph: 31-43-216854
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 . . ."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
=END=
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 15:59:05 +0100 (MET)
Subject: Quddus
To: talisman@indiana.edu
On 9 November Ahang posted a piece on Quddus's Commentary on the Sad of Samad,
in which he said that this was variously stated as being 500,000 verses and
6 times as long as the Quran. The later figure should at any rate be a 3:
the reference is on p 357:
In the days of his confinement in the town of Sari, Quddus,
whom Mirza Muhammad-Taqi had requested to write a commentary
on the Surih of Ikhlas, better known as the Surih of
Qul Huva'llahu'l-Ahad, composed, in his interpretation
of the Sad of Samad alone, a treatise which was thrice
as voluminous as the Qur'an itself.
If this is an ongoing work, the 480,200 missing verses might have been
composed later, but there is a reference on p 409 which tells us the
manuscript fitted in a single saddle-bag. (There is another reference
to the commentary on p 390, which also gives an inkling of the level
to which a fireside can aspire!). I assume that the 500,000 is mythical
rather than arithmetical in the case of Quddus: what about the Bab? Give
his long confinement and the availability of secretaries, is 500,000 verses
entirely unrealistic in his case?
Sen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen McGlinn ph: 31-43-216854
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 . . ."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 10:04:14 EWT
From: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: List Rules
To: talisman@indiana.edu
The list rules and customs are posted periodically for the benefit of
new members and for the exhortation of the old. I remind the honored
members of the prohibition of ad hominem arguments and the fact
that the culture of the list runs to the argumentitive.
John Walbridge
******
TALISMAN is an unmoderated forum for discussion of issues
related to the Babi and Baha'i Faiths: history, theology, social issues, etc.
Content can include discussion of relevant issues, queries, announcements,
advertisements of books of interest to the members, etc. The list owner is
John Walbridge, Professor of Near Eastern Languages and of Philosophy,
Indiana University, Bloomington.
1. The service is provided through the University Computer Center of
Indiana University. Participants are reminded that this service is paid for
by the taxpayers of the state of Indiana, that the fundamental purpose of
this list is scholarly, and that discussion should thus be conducted on the
basis of evidence and rational argument. The list is open to anyone
approved by the list owner.
2. The list is actually an automatic forwarding device. The list owner does
not moderate content, nor does he wish to do so. Participants are free to
argue for whatever views they wish, provided they do so courteously and
on the basis of evidence and sound reasoning.
3. Any mail addressed to the list--TALISMAN@INDIANA.EDU--will be
automatically forwarded as e-mail to all members of the list.
4. Participants are reminded that they are on the list as guests of the list
owner. Violations of decorum will be punished by being dropped from the
list. This sanction is solely at the discretion of the list owner and is not
subject to appeal.
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. On the other hand, this is an argumentative list, and
members should be willing to defend their expressed opinions against
spirited attack without taking it personally.
6. Please remember that all postings go out to all members. Sophomoric,
overly long, irrelevant, and badly thought out postings waste everybody's
time and someone's money.
7. Please refrain from unnecessarily including the text of the message you
are replying to or passages therefrom in your postings. These clutter up
the system and are a needless expense for those who personally pay for
connect time.
8. No archive of messages is available, nor is there a list of participants.
9. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to
MAJORDOMO@INDIANA.EDU.
Subj.: none
The body should contain only the command:
subscribe talisman
or:
unsubscribe talisman
10. To contact the listowner privately, e-mail to jwalbrid@indiana.edu.
11. A custom has developed on this list--based, it seems, on Maori
etiquette--that new participants should introduce themselves at some
point with a brief biography.
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 10:21:27 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: intelligent readers
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Robert, the answer to your question as to whether we have any intelligent
readers of history (incl. evolution) is: YES! Linda
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 11:23:11 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: antonpf@name.net (Anton Pickard-Ferguson)
Subject: Introducing myself to the list
Greetings,
Being a new subscriber, I'd like to introduce myself to the other memebers
of the list.
I am 42 years old, married with a daughter and live in Toronto, Ontario. My
vocation is a multimedia artist/producer as a partner in a small company.
My primary role is creating computer graphics and animation for
presentations, CD-ROM, print and video productions.
My interest in this list stems from being a Baha'i in the past but not at
present. My journey has brought me back to an investigation of the Faith
and I look forward to participating with others as I struggle with my
questions.
best regards to all,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anton Pickard-Ferguson
In.Visible.Media, Toronto, Ontario,
Net: antonpf@name.net | CIS: 71141.2323@compuserve.com
Voice: (416) 252-1650 | Fax: (416) 253-4443
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 09:42:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Quddus
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Dear Sen,
You wrote:
> On 9 November Ahang posted a piece on Quddus's Commentary on the Sad
> of Samad, in which he said that this was variously stated as being
> 500,000 verses and 6 times as long as the Quran. The later figure
> should at any rate be a 3: the reference is on p 357:
> In the days of his confinement in the town of Sari, Quddus, whom
> Mirza Muhammad-Taqi had requested to write a commentary on the Surih
> of Ikhlas, better known as the Surih of Qul Huva'llahu'l-Ahad,
> composed, in his interpretation of the Sad of Samad alone, a treatise
> which was thrice as voluminous as the Qur'an itself.
Actually the passage you quote continues to say:
"That exhaustive and masterly exposition had profoundly impressed
Mirza Muhammad-Taqi and had been responsible for the marked
consideration which he showed towards Quddus, although in the end he
joined the Sa'idu'l-'Ulama' in compassing the death of the heroic
martyrs of Shaykh Tabarsi. Quddus continued, while besieged in that
fort, to write his commentary on that Surih, and was able, despite
the vehemence of the enemy's onslaught, to pen as many verses as he
had previously written in Sari in his interpretation of that same
letter."
The way I read these, and I'm very much open to receiving corrections,
is that Quddus wrote half of it, 3 times the size of Qur'an in Sari and
then the second half, hence a total of 6 Qur'an, at Fort Tabarsi. Does
that make sense? Did I misread Nabil?
The passage in the Dawnbreakes continues yet to say:
"The rapidity and copiousness of his composition, the inestimable
treasures which his writings revealed, filled his companions with
wonder and justified his leadership in their eyes. They read eagerly
the pages of that commentary which Mulla Husayn brought to them each
day and to which he paid his share of tribute."
Believe me (and if you don't ask Juan Cole who knows Quddus infinitely
better than I), these statement are so true. His composition is so
fantastic that it overwhelms.
> I assume that the 500,000 is mythical rather than arithmetical in the
> case of Quddus: what about the Bab? Give his long confinement and the
> availability of secretaries, is 500,000 verses entirely unrealistic
> in his case?
Again, for now, I'm sticking to my theory that certain references to
Quddus and the Bab are mixed up because of the identical titles that
they had and that's where Nabil got confused over 500,000 verses for
Quddus.
The figure for the total amount of Bab's Writings as 500,000 verses, as
you well know, comes form the Persian Bayan. Now that was written mid
point (3 years) into his Ministry. Of the remaining years, He wrote
very little (actually only massive Tablets of Visitation for Quddus and
Mulla Husayn) and a Persian work, and a few other odds and ends, from
May 1849 (Quddus' martyrdom) to July 1850. So basically the last 14
months of His life He composed little.
That leaves us with nearly 2 years between the time of His statement in
the Persian Bayan to May 1849. He must have composed many, many items
during this period, so in my view 500,000 is a gross underestimate.
Besides look at the volume of His Writings contained in INBA series.
Its huge. I don't know how many verses, but its huge.
Now, does it add up to 7 or 8 hundred thousands verses (or at least
500,000 as testified in the Persian Bayan)? No way! Probably half of
it. Maybe even less. Ergo, a large chunk (half?) is missing. But the
rumor has it that there is hope .... ;-}
Do others (John, Juan, Lambden...) have a thought on these? I for one
am very interested to learn what you have to share.
regards, ahang.
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 11:04:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Zuhuru'l-Haqq -- part 3
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Beloved Friends,
Since everyone has been so tolerant of my incoherent comments on
Zuhuru'l-Haqq, I thought to share a bit more as to their contents,
so with your permission, I like to concentrate for now on the first
volume that I have in my possession, namely, ZH-3 and hope that
others would correct any inadvertent misrepresentation. (By the
way, my earlier posting titled "Zuhuru'l-Haqq and Encyclopedia" is
now considered part 2 of these series of postings (as if you really
cared ...)
In the introduction to this 532 page book, Fadil states that his
purpose in this third volume (out of 9-vol series) is to provide:
1. biographical information on believers during the Babi
Dispensation,
2. efforts of the enemies of the Cause,
3. description of Holy places associated with the early days of
the Faith
4. a general history of the Babi community in each region.
As we will see, in may ways this book is closely connected to ZH-2
and indeed a reading of it without the earlier volumes (and ZH-6)
is relatively unsatisfactory. This is because just about all the
topics discussed, have their full story told in ZH-2, and then for
many of the survivers of the Babi period, he picks up the rest of
their story in ZH-6. More on this later.
Fadil has organized the book according to the major regions of Iran
and then within each, discusses key communities and prominent
figures, both friends and foes, as well as a describing buildings
where the Bab visited or otherwise is of importance to the history
of the Cause.
I think for our purposes, its best if I outline the contents of
this book under the headings:
1. Writings of the Bab
2. References to the Revelation of the Bab
3. Documents
4. References to books and treatise
5. References to ZH-2 and ZH-6 (and other ZH's)
6. Regions
7. Holy Places
I hope this is acceptable to all. So, here we go ...
1. Writings of the Bab
Jinab-i Fadil quotes extensively from the Writings of the Bab
which he himself had a particular affinity for -- as we all do.
He included the following extracts (listed below by page number)
from the Writings of the Bab, and I'll try to include *very brief*
comments, unless folks want more detailed discussion of certain
Tablets, in which case Juan or John will do the honor:
Pd-j: Arabic, 1.5 pages long, in praise and glorification of
God, states at the end that sufficient proof (play on words here,
since one of the title of the Bab is the Proof) has been divulged
in the Book.
P13-16: Arabic, 3.5 pages long, the Bab discusses a number of
events which befell Him during the first three years of His
ministry, for example on the opening paragraph gives the exact
date of entrance in Mah-Ku prison, events leading up to His
imprisonment, showers praise on such earlier figures as Shaykh
Baha'i, Shaykh Ahmad, Siyyid Kazim, Mir Damad and expresses His
servitude unto the Threshold of Almighty, and pays homage to
earlier Prophets and holy figures.
P20-22: Arabic, 3 pages, in response to questions of one of the
Letters of the Living, Mulla Baqir-i Tabrizi, as to why so much of
the Bayan is devoted to Him Whom God will make manifest. This is
among the last Tablets of the Bab and is extremely important as in
there, He once again reiterates that He, His Revelation and all the
Letters of the Living, are but a creation of Him [Baha'u'llah] and
serve His Threshold. At one point (towards the end), the Bab
states categorically that He (Baha'u'llah) will appear in the year
80 [1280H = 1863], and that His recognition is not possible except
through His Writings. In many ways, this Tablet could be
considered the Bab's final testament, though He had a formal Will.
P53-54: Arabic, 1.5 pages, Revealed in Mah-Ku, in response to
the questions of Mirza Ahmad's Abdal-i Maraghi'i, elucidating a
particular verse of Qur'an.
P68(extra): Arabic, 3 pages, three examples of the Bab's
handwritings and 2 of His seals. One of the reproduced specimen
is the Bab's response to a query which He penned on the margin
of the incoming letter.
P69: Persian, 0.5 pages, an extract from the Persian Bayan where
He claims divinity and says that of all things mentioned in
Qur'an the most important is the Day of Resurrection (allusion to
the Bab's appearance).
P69: Arabic, 0.3 pages, a brief extract from one His prayers
P70-72: Arabic, 2.5 pages, Revealed in Mah-Ku, a Tablet
addressed to Mulla Muhammad-Taqi Harudi, where He emphatically
outlines His own stations and claims Qa'imiyyat. (Fadil points out
that in ZH-2 another major Tablet where the Bab's claim for
Qa'imiyyat is outlined was quoted. Though I don't know exactly
what Tablet Fadil is mentioning, I am familiar with a powerful
Tablet by the Bab, quoted by Abbas Alavi, where His station of
Qa'imiyyat is clearly and emphatically established.)
P82-85: Arabic, 3 pages, the Bab's Tablet addressed to Muhammad
Shah. The Bab wrote a total of at least 5 Tablets to Muhammad Shah
(for a discussion of them see my humble series of articles on the
Writings of the Bab in Payam-i Baha'i of last year). In these
Tablets, He gradually unleashed the wrath of God towards this
indecisive monarch who failed to recognize Him.
P85-89: Arabic, 4 pages, in this Tablet addressed to Haj Mirza
Aqasi, the Bab in the strongest language rebukes the incompetent
Prime Minister, assures his of his downfall and eternal damnation.
(Mirza Aqasi received a total of 3 Tablet from the Bab, and I
believe this must be the very last one addressed to him. On page
94, Fadil mentions that the other two Tablets addressed to this man
are quoted in ZH-2.)
P90: Persian, 0.2 pages, a brief extract from the Persian Bayan
where He refers to the building He occupied in Isfahan and the
significance and exalted character of all buildings associated with
Him.
P106: Arabic, 0.2 pages, a brief extract where He refers to one of
the Letters of the Living, Mulla Ali-y Bastami, (the first to leave
Shiraz for Iraq) and says that he recognized the truth by a single
verse without requiring any other proofs.
P106: Arabic, 0.4 pages, a brief extract from the Bab's Tablet of
Visitation for Imam Ali where Mulla Ali Bastami is referred to as
the "gem of the believers" and much praise is showered upon him.
P107: Arabic, 0.1 pages, a sentence out of the 2nd Tablet
addressed to Shaykh Muhammad Hasan (who is also mentioned in the
Kitab-i Aqdas as the one who failed to recognized the Bab, and he
is the author of 24 volumes "Javahiru'l-Kalam" (an encyclopedia of
Islamic law) -- the most useless pile of nonsense ever assembled!),
where Mulla Ali-y Bastami is referred to as to "the one who
prostrated himself before Me".
P122-24: Arabic, 2 pages, a general proclamatory Tablet of the Bab
to "the people of Bayan" where all believers are urged to "hasten
to the land of Kh (Khurasan)" to attain the presence of Mulla
Husayn, engage in teaching the Faith there, and render [Mulla]
Husayn victorious. (Husayn is mentioned a few times in this
Tablet, and I firmly believe that it alludes also to Baha'u'llah.)
This Tablet begs to be translated. Its powerful. Pulsates with
call to action and majestic language.
Well, I've bored you all enough for one posting, we'll pick it up
again later.
much love to all, ahang.
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 12:31:41 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: tarjuman@umich.edu
Subject: Baha'u'llah's notes to Ode of the Dove
I am slowly continuing to digitalize my translation of Baha'u'llah's
notes to his "Ode of the Dove," a mystical poem written in Sulaymaniyyah,
a provisional translation of which I posted earlier. Here is the note to
verse 8:
7. The mistral's fragrance wafted from Her hair,
and Beauty's eyes were solaced by Her gaze.
8. Her shining face gave Guidance sage advice,
and Moses' soul was cleansed by Her form's blaze.
8. When Moses cleansed and sanctified the feet of the divine Self,
Who had been consigned to human form, from the sandals of
contingent fancies and drew forth the hand of divine Power from the
fold of grandeur in the cloak of splendor, He arrived in the holy, good
and blessed valley of the heart. This is the base of the throne of
everlasting effulgence and the seat of divine and glorious converse.
And when He reached that land of Sinai, which lieth outstretched to
the right of the illumined Spot, He smelled the perfumed odor of the
Spirit from east of eternity, and perceived the undying lights from all
directions, without direction. After the darkened glass of self had been
removed, the wick of the divine Essence blazed forth in the lamp of his
heart, ignited by the passionate scent of godly love and the flaming
brand of the fire of divine unity. And after the stations of opposition
had been eliminated, He arrived in the valley of eternal sobriety
through the wine of the attainment to an incomparable Countenance
and the pure nectar of the imperishable.
Through the attractive power of His longing for the divine
Meeting, He became aware of the city of everlasting life. "He entered
the city at a time when its people were heedless" (Q. 28:15). And
behold, He discerned the fire of the timeless godhead, and shone with
the light of the Almighty God. He said to His family, "Do ye tarry
here. Verily, I observe a fire" (Q. 20:10). When He discovered and
perceived the visage of pre-existent, most gracious Guidance in the
tree that is neither of the east nor the west (Q. 24:35), the changeable
and ephemeral face was honored and glorified by attaining to the
ancient, imperishable Countenance. In the blazing fire He discovered
the wondrous, inaccessible visage of Guidance which had been
concealed in the bosoms of the Unseen. This is that to which He then
gave utterance: "or I shall find guidance in this fire." (Q. 20:10).
Even so, perceive ye the intent of the blessed verse, "He who
made for ye fire from the green tree." (Q. 36:80). O would that there
were a listener to comprehend it, and that one drop from the vast
ocean of fire, one spark from the storehouse of flames, could be
mentioned. But it is better, after all, that this pearl remain hidden
within the shell of pure longing and stored in the vessels of secrecy,
that every stranger might be excluded and every intimate friend may be
garbed in pilgrim's dress before the Ka`bah of splendor, that he may
enter the sanctuary of beauty. How happy is the soul that consumes
the cage of the body in the flames of the fire of love, and becomes the
familiar of the Spirit, that he may attain unto the exalted mercy of
repose, and that the lofty bounty of glory may be bestowed upon him.
All that of which mention hath been made concerning the ranks
of guidance and the grades of self-purification in the station of Moses-
-may peace be upon Him and our Prophet--hath reference to the
manifestation of these effulgences in the world of outward
appearances. Otherwise, that Exalted One was always and shall
forever be led by the guidance of God. Nay, more, it was from Him
that the sun of guidance dawned and the moon of God's grace
appeared. It was from His essential being that the flames of the divine
Essence were ignited, and from the brilliance of His forehead that the
light of eternity became radiant. He Himself resolved such doubts by
the words He spoke when questioned by Pharaoh about the man He
had killed. He responded, "I did it indeed, and I was one of those who
erred. And I fled from you when I feared you; but My Lord hath given
Me judgment and hath made Me One of the Apostles." (Q. 26:20-21).
The discourse hath come to an end, though in truth this matter is
inexhaustible and unending.
Note: This passage is extremely important for Baha'u'llah's
theophanology, since it explains how he thought the Manifestation of God
could *both* be spoken of as traversing various spiritual stations and
growing in spiritual stature *and* could be spoken of as an eternal sun
of guidance. The former diction has to do with the tajalli or
effulgence/manifestation of these attributes in the external world, while
the latter diction has to do with the esoteric world. The metaphysical
assumptions here, as Nima will recognize, derive from the Ibn al-`Arabi
tradition. Baha'u'llah's solution is important, because otherwise Moses'
admission in the Qur'an that he was among the sinners or those gone
astray (Da:lli:n) appears to contradict the Shi`ite/Babi tenet of the
`iSmat or infallibility/immaculacy of the Prophets. Here is evidence
that Baha'u'llah thought prophets could commit murder exoterically while
maintaining their immaculacy esoterically (presumably on the level of the
Universal Intellect).
cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 10:20:56 -0800
From: derekmc@ix.netcom.com (DEREK COCKSHUT )
Subject: Dastardly Plot.
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
My dear Talismanians
Due to dark forces at work , we had no power at Bosch until late last
night from Monday . So I have just scanned the wide variety of messages
. I shall be posting on Sunday the True story of Linda in DC . Also I
have some interesting information on removal of rights in the USA
Baha'i Community which I will post as well the publishing issue .
Last night I was asked to go to a special fireside in San Jose . The
San Jose Chief of Police and the Chairman of the San Jose Airport
Commission came to hear about the Faith , great fireside went on after
10.30 started at 7.00 . We are meeting them again to continue.
Did you miss me Linda?
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
=END=
From: kseiden@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Subject: Darwin on the Brain...
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 13:06:10 -0600 (CST)
>
> Robert Johnston wrote
> >>Clearly Darwin's view must be reconciled with 'Abdu'l-Baha's. And I refer
> particularly to Darwin's failure to see that -- to paraphrase 'Abdu'l-Baha--
> "man was always man."
Sandy Fotos wrote:
>
> Some Baha'i friends in the natural sciences (and me too, since I have a
> background in maine botany )have felt that this statement refers to
> potentiality rather than to morphology.
>
> The particular line which would eventually evolve into humans was always
> distinct and identifiable in terms of its future direction, although not in
> terms of its physical appearance vis a vis other organisms.
>
> Again, may I argue for the longitudinal perspective?
I guess I see this point coming up again and again among Baha'is, that is:
physically humans resemble animals but their line was distinct all along...
I just want to say that in terms of the natural sciences, I can see no way
whatsoever of making this a meaningful statement. In other words you can make
the claim that a billion years ago Amoeba A mutated and gave rise to one
lineage of organisms and Amoeba B mutated and gave rise to another lineage of
organisms including humans, however there would be no empirical way of
demonstrating that Amoeba A and Amoeba B were distinct in some significant way
(at least biologically/physically) such that humans had to evolve from
Amoeba B rather than Amoeba A. As far was I can see the only way to make the
distinction of humans from other creatures, all along, plausible in any way
is to argue the point metaphysically/metaphorically. This,
argument,however, rests primarily on Faith rather than empirical verifiability
and will tend to carry little weight with individuals outside of the Faith.
A variation on the separateness of humans theme is to point out how distinct
humans are in terms of their non-physical qualities; that is, physically
humans resemble animals, but "spiritually" they are distinct and have been all
along. The "hard" response from your average biologist will be that what
distinguishes humans is their sophisticated brain, which incidentally, evolved
physically along with the rest of the body. This is a very tough problem to
think about and we need good thinking on this issue to become more convincing
to the rest of the world.
I don't mean to sound cynical or negative, but I've tended to observe a
tendency within the Baha'i community to gloss over these sorts of issues, which
are actually of fundamental importance in properly "squaring" reason with
faith.. How can we make a convincing case that
humans are not extremely sophisticated animals, what arguments can we make
that it's not just a better brain that distinguishes us; why argue that we
have a soul or talk about "spirituality" if it might all amount to having better
biochips in head!! We can do it, but we need to try!! Philosophers of
science grab your pens!!!
OK, I'll get off my soap-box now...
Warmest Regards to All!
Ken
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 14:26:53
From: "Stockman, Robert"
To: talisman@indiana.edu, "Ahang Rabbani"
Subject: Re[2]: Quddus
Have we any idea whether the number "500,000" was meant to be literal
or figurative? For example, in *God Passes By* Shoghi Effendi says
Baha'u'llah composed one hundred volumes of works. We now know he
wrote 15,000-20,000 tablets, but the Guardian did not have access to
such a statistic; under such circumstances, "100 volumes" is an
excellent way of making the scale of Baha'u'llah's revelation
apparent. But the number probably is not literal.
-- Rob Stockman
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Quddus
Author: "Ahang Rabbani" at INTERNET
Date: 12/16/95 11:17 AM
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Dear Sen,
You wrote:
> On 9 November Ahang posted a piece on Quddus's Commentary on the Sad
> of Samad, in which he said that this was variously stated as being
> 500,000 verses and 6 times as long as the Quran. The later figure
> should at any rate be a 3: the reference is on p 357:
> In the days of his confinement in the town of Sari, Quddus, whom
> Mirza Muhammad-Taqi had requested to write a commentary on the Surih
> of Ikhlas, better known as the Surih of Qul Huva'llahu'l-Ahad,
> composed, in his interpretation of the Sad of Samad alone, a treatise
> which was thrice as voluminous as the Qur'an itself.
Actually the passage you quote continues to say:
"That exhaustive and masterly exposition had profoundly impressed
Mirza Muhammad-Taqi and had been responsible for the marked
consideration which he showed towards Quddus, although in the end he
joined the Sa'idu'l-'Ulama' in compassing the death of the heroic
martyrs of Shaykh Tabarsi. Quddus continued, while besieged in that
fort, to write his commentary on that Surih, and was able, despite
the vehemence of the enemy's onslaught, to pen as many verses as he
had previously written in Sari in his interpretation of that same
letter."
The way I read these, and I'm very much open to receiving corrections,
is that Quddus wrote half of it, 3 times the size of Qur'an in Sari and
then the second half, hence a total of 6 Qur'an, at Fort Tabarsi. Does
that make sense? Did I misread Nabil?
The passage in the Dawnbreakes continues yet to say:
"The rapidity and copiousness of his composition, the inestimable
treasures which his writings revealed, filled his companions with
wonder and justified his leadership in their eyes. They read eagerly
the pages of that commentary which Mulla Husayn brought to them each
day and to which he paid his share of tribute."
Believe me (and if you don't ask Juan Cole who knows Quddus infinitely
better than I), these statement are so true. His composition is so
fantastic that it overwhelms.
> I assume that the 500,000 is mythical rather than arithmetical in the
> case of Quddus: what about the Bab? Give his long confinement and the
> availability of secretaries, is 500,000 verses entirely unrealistic
> in his case?
Again, for now, I'm sticking to my theory that certain references to
Quddus and the Bab are mixed up because of the identical titles that
they had and that's where Nabil got confused over 500,000 verses for
Quddus.
The figure for the total amount of Bab's Writings as 500,000 verses, as
you well know, comes form the Persian Bayan. Now that was written mid
point (3 years) into his Ministry. Of the remaining years, He wrote
very little (actually only massive Tablets of Visitation for Quddus and
Mulla Husayn) and a Persian work, and a few other odds and ends, from
May 1849 (Quddus' martyrdom) to July 1850. So basically the last 14
months of His life He composed little.
That leaves us with nearly 2 years between the time of His statement in
the Persian Bayan to May 1849. He must have composed many, many items
during this period, so in my view 500,000 is a gross underestimate.
Besides look at the volume of His Writings contained in INBA series.
Its huge. I don't know how many verses, but its huge.
Now, does it add up to 7 or 8 hundred thousands verses (or at least
500,000 as testified in the Persian Bayan)? No way! Probably half of
it. Maybe even less. Ergo, a large chunk (half?) is missing. But the
rumor has it that there is hope .... ;-}
Do others (John, Juan, Lambden...) have a thought on these? I for one
am very interested to learn what you have to share.
regards, ahang.
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 14:26:49
From: "Stockman, Robert"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: 90s pub stats
Fascinating statistics. But they need to be normalized to
English-language membership to be useful. The Baha'is probably have
about 250,000 English language speakers worldwide; the Mormons, five
million (4.5 million of the some 8 million Mormons woldwide live in
the U.S.); the Adventists, a million or so (there are 750,000 Seventh
Day Adventists in the US alone). Spiritualism is a vaguely defined
movement and I don't know what the estimates for membership are, but
it is also a subject of a lot of popular and scholarly literature.
The Christian Scientists probably have about twice the
English-speaking membership of the Faith worldwide, so their numbers
are comparable.
It is not clear to me that one can conclude much about the impact of
prepublication review from the statistics below. Considering how
obscure we are in academia, the number of publications listed below
seems pretty good to me.
-- Rob Stockman
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: 90s pub stats
Author: "K. Paul Johnson" at INTERNET
Date: 12/15/95 4:00 PM
One last time-- it occurred to me that it would be more
instructive in terms of measuring the effect of current policy
to look at current publishing rates. So I got just the 1990s
publications, all formats, all languages, for the six groups in
question. Theosophy falls to last place, showing our lack of
membership growth in the last few decades, but Baha'i still lags
way behind all the others: Mormon 1886, Adventist 1107, Spiritualist
673, Christian Science 359, Baha'i 255, Theosophy 191. On a
per capita basis, I think the Theosophists are still the
bibliophiles par excellence.
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 14:53:50 -0600 (CST)
From: Paul Easton
To: Talisman
Subject: Re-Intro and Ignorant Questions...
Allah'u'abha!
After having been unsubscribed from Talisman for some time I have decided
to jump in again. However I chose to do so at an inopportune time - as
I have 6 finals next week, so I don't expect to be very active in the
discussions for a week or so.
My name is Paul Chistopher Easton and I am an undergraduate ( soon to be
2nd Semester Senior ) at the the University of Wisconsin - Stevens
Point. My major is International Studies, with an Asian emphasis and a
Religious Studies minor.
I became a Baha'i two years ago in Taiwan where I was teaching English as
a respite from school. I speak "survival Chinese" ( excuse me, waiter!
my snails are still moving... ) and - if all goes well - I'll be studying
Chinese full-time next fall at the Mandarin Training Center, National
Taiwan Normal University on a scholarship - would it be innappropriate to
ask for a few prayers for acceptance to be directed my way?
My interest in Baha'i Scholarship began when I returned to the United
States. My great-great grandfather, Peter Z. Easton, was a missionary in
Tabriz. Thinking that perhaps he would have known something about the
Babi and Baha'i Faiths I began searching for his writings. Under one
search (this still being before I had actually read any of Peter Z's
writings) the name Mirza Abu'l-Fadl appeared. That sounded promising, so
I posted to BAHAI-DICUSS asking if anyone had heard of this person, esp.
in connection with Peter Z. Easton. Well I'm still tasting the
aftertaste of my foot, but I do appreciate the help and kindness offered
by those who did respond.
Since then Mirza Abu'l-Fadl has become one of my heros, not only as a
Baha'i scholar, but also a man who had overcome both his earlier hubris
and quite an addiction to nicotine. Both of which I have had to deal
with my self.
An on-going project is still trying to dig up more info on Peter Z.
Easton and to find out what happened to his library in Tabriz after he
died.
Also, I am interested in studying the Baha'i Faith in China, and in East
Asia in general.
Interests also include: canoeing, backpacking, HTML, Richard Braughtigan,
Eastern Religious Philosophy, relationships, people and thinking about
those things that I will never be able to understand - in hopes that I
may grasp a few of the little problems in life.
Pet peeves include: scholars who tackle each other instead of issues and
people who complain about the weather more than once a day.
This is longer than I had intended it to be, I need to study for my
finals and the computer lab I'm at is closing. So I will have to save my
ignorant questions for later. Glad to be back! Looking forward to
fruitful discussions.
Yours,
_____________________________________________________________________________
Paul C. Easton
_____________________________________________________________________________
HOME || WORK
________________________________________||___________________________________
2321 Jersey Street || UW-Stevens Point
Stevens Point, WI 54481 || International Programs
|| Stevens Point, WI 54481-3897
PHONE: (715) 344-4174 || PHONE: (715) 346-2717
E-MAIL: peaston@worf.uwsp.edu || FAX: (715) 346-3591
________________________________________||___________________________________
O Lord! make us firm in Thy love and cause us to be loving toward the
whole of mankind. Confirm us in service to the world of humanity, so
that we may become the servants of Thy servants, that we may love all Thy
creatures and become compassionate to all Thy people. -`Abdu'l-Baha'
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 15:00:14
From: "Stockman, Robert"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Darwin on the Brain...
I quite agree with Ken; we can only understand humanity as "separate"
in some sort of metaphorical way. If we assume that humanity as a
species has always been biologically separate from all other life on
earth, then we must dismiss anatomical and biochemical similarities as
coincidence. And when one considers that our genetic material is 98%
similar to chimpanzees this would be an extraordinary argument indeed.
It would be about as scientifically meaningful as the argument that
Genesis and evolution can be reconciled by realizing the devil created
the fossils. When one takes such an approach, the harmony of science
and religion collapses.
But I think there are also philosophical problems with `Abdu'l-Baha's
argument even when it is taken as a metaphorical statement. The best
way of reconciling `Abdu'l-Baha and evolution is to argue that the
first life form on earth was the ancestor of all life on earth, and
therefore was the ancestor of humanity as well, and thus was
"potentially human." As life evolved and species split off the trunk
of the tree that led to modern homo sapiens sapiens, they ceased to
have the potential to be human and thus were ordinary life forms.
Presumably this means that at the level of individual life forms that
one individual had the potential to be human because it produced
descendants that eventually were us, whereas the individual's brother
produced descendants that became something else. Thus within one
"family" some members were potentially human and others were not, and
thus some had souls and others did not. Yet the individuals might not
have had any significant genetic differences between them; it might be
that X was potentially human because of something a great great great
granddaughter did accidentally that led to that line's survival and
mutation into something slightly different, whereas Y had one
descendant who accidentally fell off a cliff before reproducing, and
thus Y is not potentially human.
Obviously, scientists would be very uncomfortable with the theoretical
and untestable notion that individual amoeba X had a soul and her
brother amoeba Y did not. So we must remember that this idea exists
and makes sense only in the realms of theology, not in the realm of
science. We can hardly fault Darwin for that.
Another interesting implication of `Abdu'l-Baha's theory is that it
turns the usual popular conception of evolution on its head: evolution
was not the ascent of man, but the descent of everything else from
man. Strange.
But perhaps all of this is to philosophize too much. It is better to
remember (1) `Abdu'l-Baha was making theological statements, not
scientific ones, and possibly not even philosophical ones; and (2)
this should be viewed in the realm of metaphor, and metaphors can
never be pushed too far.
-- Rob Stockman
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Darwin on the Brain...
Author: kseiden@casbah.acns.nwu.edu at INTERNET
Date: 12/16/95 1:33 PM
>
> Robert Johnston wrote
> >>Clearly Darwin's view must be reconciled with 'Abdu'l-Baha's. And I refer
> particularly to Darwin's failure to see that -- to paraphrase 'Abdu'l-Baha--
> "man was always man."
Sandy Fotos wrote:
>
> Some Baha'i friends in the natural sciences (and me too, since I have a
> background in maine botany )have felt that this statement refers to
> potentiality rather than to morphology.
>
> The particular line which would eventually evolve into humans was always
> distinct and identifiable in terms of its future direction, although not in
> terms of its physical appearance vis a vis other organisms.
>
> Again, may I argue for the longitudinal perspective?
I guess I see this point coming up again and again among Baha'is, that is:
physically humans resemble animals but their line was distinct all along...
I just want to say that in terms of the natural sciences, I can see no way
whatsoever of making this a meaningful statement. In other words you can make
the claim that a billion years ago Amoeba A mutated and gave rise to one
lineage of organisms and Amoeba B mutated and gave rise to another lineage of
organisms including humans, however there would be no empirical way of
demonstrating that Amoeba A and Amoeba B were distinct in some significant way
(at least biologically/physically) such that humans had to evolve from
Amoeba B rather than Amoeba A. As far was I can see the only way to make the
distinction of humans from other creatures, all along, plausible in any way
is to argue the point metaphysically/metaphorically. This,
argument,however, rests primarily on Faith rather than empirical verifiability
and will tend to carry little weight with individuals outside of the Faith.
A variation on the separateness of humans theme is to point out how distinct
humans are in terms of their non-physical qualities; that is, physically
humans resemble animals, but "spiritually" they are distinct and have been all
along. The "hard" response from your average biologist will be that what
distinguishes humans is their sophisticated brain, which incidentally, evolved
physically along with the rest of the body. This is a very tough problem to
think about and we need good thinking on this issue to become more convincing
to the rest of the world.
I don't mean to sound cynical or negative, but I've tended to observe a
tendency within the Baha'i community to gloss over these sorts of issues, which
are actually of fundamental importance in properly "squaring" reason with
faith.. How can we make a convincing case that
humans are not extremely sophisticated animals, what arguments can we make
that it's not just a better brain that distinguishes us; why argue that we
have a soul or talk about "spirituality" if it might all amount to having better
biochips in head!! We can do it, but we need to try!! Philosophers of
science grab your pens!!!
OK, I'll get off my soap-box now...
Warmest Regards to All!
Ken
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 17:11:38 -0500 (EST)
From: Richard Vernon Hollinger
To: Paul Easton
Cc: Talisman
Subject: Re: Re-Intro and Ignorant Questions...
On Sat, 16 Dec 1995, Paul Easton wrote:
> My interest in Baha'i Scholarship began when I returned to the United
> States. My great-great grandfather, Peter Z. Easton, was a missionary in
> Tabriz.
This is fascinating. Are you a first-generation Baha'i? I always
suspected that someone in the Easton family was friendly to the Faith,
because on two different occassions I have come accross postcards from
Peter Z. Easton (from Tabriz) dating from the late nineteenth century, in
the papers of Baha'is: once in the Los Angeles Baha'i Archives and once in the
papers Charles Mason Remey at Yale. In neither instance was there in
indication
as to how the cards got there, but I suspected that someone in his family
might have given them to Baha'i friends because they depicted sites in Iran.
> An on-going project is still trying to dig up more info on Peter Z.
> Easton and to find out what happened to his library in Tabriz after he
> died.
I belive there is correspondence from and biographical material about
Peter Z. Easton in the holdings of the Presbyterian Historical Society, in
Philadelphia.
Cheers,
Richard
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 18:02:15 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: Baha'i Encyclopedia / Zuhurul Haq
Dear Ahang and All,
Hopefully we can learn from past mistakes. One note though:
Ali Akbar Furutan has a special place in the hearts of
Baha'is - especially Iranian Baha'is (he is probably thought
of the same as William Sears is thought of in the West). Most likely
due to his incredible memory - I was in Haifa in May and the fortune
of meeting him - he is in his late 80's or early 90's. When I introduced
myself and told him where my father was from, he immediately remembered
something about that area and my father's greater family. Ofcourse
that does not say anything about his actions in the Fadil Mazandarani
episode.
It seems from what you said Mazandarani decided not to press
the issue with the Guardian. It also seems that he did not stop
his scholarship - just did not let many people know about it.
Hopefull, someday soon we can benefit from his works -
which btw sound incredibly massive.
As you probably guessed by now I have another of my
suggestions - being hopelessly optimistic I'll keep
suggesting until somebody says stop :-) And even then,
my conscience will say to keep at it ;-)
May be we can vote on the following: to formally ask
the staff of the World Centre's Research Department to
come online to Talisman - and not just as lurkers. The
give and take, I feel, can be beneficial - Robert Stockman
who is the director of the US Research Office is online;
a fact that I think the other scholars present here
(and the rest of us) greatly appreciate.
And one observation: can we not assume that since
Talisman is here and has the tacit approval of the
House that there has been a passive change in policy
with regards to scholarship: we have seen provisional
translations, Baha'i Encyclopedia articles, the
"Service of Women" paper, threads on just about every
conroversial subject within the Faith - all without
review.
In spite of the occasional food fights (and I have thrown my
share of tomatoes) this is a watershed event - I hope we can
make the best of it.
take care,
sAmAn
=END=
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 13:44:31 +1200
To: kseiden@casbah.acns.nwu.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: Re: Darwin on the Brain...
Dear Ken,
You wrote:
"This,
argument,however, rests primarily on Faith rather than empirical verifiability
and will tend to carry little weight with individuals outside of the
Faith."
Response: One can't bend reality so that it suits the candy-floss fantasies
of a bewildered humanity.
The '"hard" response from your average biologist' is a pretty cynical
position. Why accord it any real value?
If we accept humanity in a foetus then, logically, why should be not accord
humanity to our ancestor who looked like a possum?
I yawn, actually. How many times does it need to be stated that the Baha'i
conception of science is not limited to empiricism...before it really sinks
in.
Robert (a barking ant with a long nose in a black mood) Johnston.
=END=
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 13:52:17 +1200
To: "Stockman, Robert" , talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: Re: Darwin on the Brain...
Robert Stockman wrote:
It is better to
> remember (1) `Abdu'l-Baha was making theological statements, not
> scientific ones, and possibly not even philosophical ones;
This appears to marginalise the station of 'Abdu'l-Baha to the outskirts of
science. Even the fool Heidegger knew that modern science was a mere
branch of metaphysics. Robert, if you can prove 'Abdu'l-Baha wrong, then
I'll listen. If you can't then I humbly suggest you give Him the benefit
of the doubt...[at least]
Robert (barking mad on a long black Sunday afternoon) Johnston
=END=
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 14:02:47 +1200
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: Re: intelligent readers
Linda,
Your wrote:
>Robert, the answer to your question as to whether we have any intelligent
>readers of history (incl. evolution) is: YES! Linda
Oh? Please name someone here who has understood the Baha'i teachings on
evolution, has reconciled them with Darwinism, and has provided ( or is
able to provide) scholarly evidence of his/her insights? Really, this is
just the same old Socrates story in a different outfit. Why don't we go
back and fight that one out again? I'd really love to hear the comments of
John and Juan re. the House letter.
Robert (a long black springing dog-ant) Johnston
=END=
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 21:08:54 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Baha'u'llah's notes to Od...
Juan : Goodness this just keeps getting better . You already know I
am partial to this "poem ". Are there more notes to this as well ?
For what its worth it seems to me there is a liturgical feast herein
as well as among additional of Baha u llah's works along the same lines .
All it takes is a little imagination and permission for the friends to
explore this revelatory material . One of the things that is always painfully
aware to me when speaking with members of other religious traditions is the
paucity of criticl work that would constitute a body of spirituality. It is
material like this which aids considerably in building that "praxis " . I
for one appreciate a great deal the time and effort tha goes into all this .
The fruits , if the friends will make use of it , will be enormous . It will
also go a long way to demonstrating to and for others that there is a very
real sense of spirituality in the Faith of Bahau llah. This one I am going
to be sharing with the Jewish folks I made reference to earlier in Inter
-faith dialogue .
There is a Syrian Orthodox priest whom I have known for several years
now - he is well aware of the Faith - who I have discussed some of this with
. He is a deeply virtuous man
and one of his remaeks a few years back to me was that of the material on
the Faith he had seen was much like the kind of things that children are
taught in Sunday schools . He wondered where the "heart" of the Faith was
its spiritual praxis . Lasat spring I shared with him your original "Ode"
translation and this summer Stephens work on the Halih . He is beginning to
think there may be something substantive about this Bahu llah thing after all
other than that I may happen to be an intersting guy . He is not likely to
become a Bahai and thst is not my goal, frankly, but he does have a more
favorable view of "Bahai" than before . Again it just opens up doors for
"consorting with the followers of all religions in friendliness and
fellowship ." He and I have on occasion , amidst the light and incense of
the church recited together the "Jesus Prayer " . Whew - now that is a
powereful one . I have already informed him that a little spiritual quid pro
quo requires the same with regard to some things from the "Ode" and "Halih"
and the song of the Heavenly Dove ( Her song as Baha says after all ) " Thou
art God . There is no God but Thee. He has let me practice to my hearts
content the "Alastu bi rabbikun" over the years .
To make a long story short I hope you and others will continue to make
available this kind of Bahau llahs work . I hope some critical work will be
done as well . I have so little to give my orthodox friend that addresses
context and commentary; the kind of work that makes Revelation come alive and
like a great story you just cant wait to tell others . It is in the
spiritual praxis that grows out of worship that lies transformation - and our
ability to truly attract the hearts of the world .
FOR JOHN : A reminder the *Deathless Youth* :)
warm regards ,
Terry
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 21:29:22 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: standing by my words
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Dear Robert, I do think that Ken and Rob's excellent responses on the subject
of evolution are quite adequate to prove my point that there are highly
intelligent and knowledgeable people here on Talisman who can explain the
concept quite adequately. I refuse to return to the bad old days when science
had to conform to theology. And, I trust you read the posting from Juan of
Abdu'l Baha's talk in New York. This says it all. We should not follow
blindly.
I feel quite confident that, if the information we have now on evolution were
available to Abdu'l Baha, that he would have explained things differently. He
was not a scientist. He was a true religious leader - a moral guide for us to
follow. It belittles his station (in my eyes) to make him into some cult
figure who somehow had all knowledge of all aspects of life. This was not his
claim, Robert. We should read his words to feed our hearts, not to nit pick
about scientific issues. Let's leave that to the scientists, please!!
I found Ahang's posting about the story of Fadil to be both fascinating and
heart wrenching. I suppose I can relate so strongly to it because of the
Encyclopoedia project. Three cheers for the battle against Fundamentalism!
And, Derek. Long may your power outage continue.
Dear friends, just as I was posting this note to Derek, the telphone rang. It
was my dear nemisis, Derek. He and Burl now have a campaign of telephone
torment. I will never be left in peace. I dread tuning into Talisman on
Monday for the Derek and Burl scandal hour. They admit to conspiring against
me. Is this the example that Abdu'l Baha gave us? Should we not be asking
ourselves, would Abdu'l Baha approve of Derek and Burl's treatment of me? (We
are supposed to ask ourselves questions like that, aren't we?) By the way,
Burl has unsubscribed from Talisman for the week. However, I do believe that
he will be sorry. I suggest that everyone forward their messages to Burl this
week to make sure he has plenty of reading material when he returns. Thank you
in advance for your cooperation in this matter. Linda
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 22:11:36 EWT
From: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: Evolution
To: talisman@indiana.edu
I remember smugly telling seekers at firesides that because Baha'is
believed in the harmony of science and religion, we would not be in
the foolish position of having to deny the discoveries of modern
biology. I have a private theory that before God absolves me and
leaves me in peace as a Baha'i, all the things that I did while I was
young and fanatical will be visited on my head.
The following is a paragraph I wrote for the article on evolution in
the Baha'i Encyclopedia:
*******
AB's statements on evolution reflect the unease of many thoughtful
religious people of the time at the use and misuse of Darwinist concepts.
Evolution was being used as a justification for the abandonment of
traditional religious and spiritual ideas, of standards of decency and
kindness, and of the social solidarity that made the rich and powerful
responsible for the well-being of the poorer and weaker memebers of
society. The formulation given in this talk is clearly AB's attempt to
offer a way out of this dilemma, using the philosophical and theological
concepts of the sophisticated Iranian philosophical tradition, which since
the work of the great philosopher Mulla Sadra in the 17th century, had
seen the transformation of substance as a key to understanding the
deepest nature of being and the godhead. Thus, AB's statements on
evolution should be read not literally as corrections to a particular
scientific theory but as affirmations that scientific truth must be
understood in the context of a spiritual view of the universe.
*********
As to the larger question of Abdu'l-Baha's omniscience on scientific and
scholarly matters, I offer the following anecdote. Those who have
heard it before, such as my dear wife, may go on to the next posting:
When I was in Haifa on pilgrimage some years ago, as custom dictates
I went to pray at the deathbed of Abdu'l-Baha. Now, since this was
day eight, not counting the earlier visits to Jerusalem, Bethleham, and
Nazareth, I was rather shrined out. I knelt by the bed, assumed the
expression of pious blankness learned in childhood, and tried to read
the titles of the books on the bedside table that, I fancied, were being
read to Abdu'l-Baha during his last illness. One was a volume of
the *Da'irat al-Ma'arif*, the first great modern Arabic encyclopedia.
john walbridge
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 19:49:59 -0800
From: derekmc@ix.netcom.com (DEREK COCKSHUT )
Subject: Fwd: standing by my words
To: talisman@indiana.edu
---- Begin Forwarded Message
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
X-To: PO%"talisman"
Subject: standing by my words
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Sender: owner-talisman@indiana.edu
Precedence: bulk
!
And, Derek. Long may your power outage continue.
''My Dear Linda
Your worst nightmare happened not only has the power been restored but
my computor has been given the kiss of life , back again to bring the
truth to the nations .''
Dear friends, just as I was posting this note to Derek, the telphone
rang. It
was my dear nemisis, Derek. He and Burl now have a campaign of
telephone
torment. I will never be left in peace. I dread tuning into Talisman
on
Monday for the Derek and Burl scandal hour. They admit to conspiring
against
me.
''Burl and I has good supportive friends naturally speak to each other.
Linda has locked John up in a cupboard under the stairs because he
tried to tell the truth over DC , is this the example of correct
behaviour ?''
Is this the example that Abdu'l Baha gave us? Should we not be asking
ourselves, would Abdu'l Baha approve of Derek and Burl's treatment of
me? (We
are supposed to ask ourselves questions like that, aren't we?) By the
way,
Burl has unsubscribed from Talisman for the week. However, I do
believe that
he will be sorry. I suggest that everyone forward their messages to
Burl this
week to make sure he has plenty of reading material when he returns.
Thank you
in advance for your cooperation in this matter. Linda
Would all those who feel Linda is being unfair to John please E'Mail
her and those who believe she is acting correctly please E"Mail her .
We would like a report , young lady , on this matter .
A Tit-bit from Monday's posting Linda caused a major problem by
carrying a large banner that read ' Shi'ite's Rule Forever 'at the
lecture on the 4 rightful Caliphs and throwing two custard pies at the
presenter . Her falling over on the bus was a result of grapping hold
of both ears of Nima's idol Sorush and hollering this is what Lyndon
Johnson did to the amazed bus riders. The poor chap now has sore
enlarged ears and hasn't a clue who Lyndon Johnson was . These and more
are some of the trials of John Walbridge at Mensa without the n in DC .
John may shortly be receiving a very high honor because of his trials
and tribulations with Linda , watch for Monday .
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 95 21:53:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Fadil
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Just got back from taking my boys to see Giumonji; absolutely a
must-see movie, filled with great action... though our 7 year old
will probably sleep in our bed tonight. Robin Williams is great.
This must be a brief note as I'm very tired. But judging by the
number of private emails, it clear that the memory of Fadil has
touched many hearts. I will deal with some of the specifics
privately. However do want to comment on a couple of things.
1. A dear friend objected to my comparison of Zuhuru'l-Haqq and
Encyclopedia project and specifically my use of the expression "a
lot of similarities" between the two. I really feel this friend is
right and there are not "a lot" of similarities between the two
events. After all:
one took place in Iran, the other in the States;
one was in 30's and 40's, the other in 80's and 90's;
one involved a single man, the other a whole Board;
one involved materials in Persian, the other is solely in English;
one required intervention of the Guardian, the other the House;
etc., etc., ...
Yes, I agree that there are not "a lot" of similarities, ... just
the tiny one that neither work has seen the light of day. Oh well,
I stand corrected.
2. Another wanted to know who the "bad guys" were in ZH's episode.
The answer to that question is very simple: there were none. On
one side of the debate was Fadil with his impeccable record, and on
the other side were folks like Ishraq-Khavari (a profoundly
magnificent man whom I love just as much as I love Fadil) plus the
NSA of Iran (4 of whom were elevated to the rank of the Hands and
again I deeply love and admire each of them and grew up with their
names on our lips and in our heart). So, when I say there were no
"bad guys", I mean exactly that! There was not a single person, in
my view, who acted out of self interest or maliciously.
The issues became complex. Remember that this debate spanned over
two decades, perhaps more, to unfold and there are many
correspondences from the beloved Guardian which I have not seen on
this subject, so its not just confined to the mickymouse letter that
the NSA published in 1951.
I just wanted to share my strong belief that this episode involved
men, each with historic contributions to the Cause, acting in the
very best interest of the community. As such, we must be very
careful not to oversimply the issues.
In this regard, there *is* a great deal of similarity between the ZH
episode and Encyclopedia project.
3. My comments about fundamentalism in the community is solely in
regard to the attitude of certain believes regarding the literal
exactness of the Dawnbreakers. Those who feel that the Dawnbreakers
is the "standard" in the sense that it contains no error, well here
is a news flash: You are wrong.
With that, I'm off to bed.
love, ahang.
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 18:02:55 -0700
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: hwmiller@ccnet.com (Henry Miller)
Subject: Re: Homosexuality
Cc: lua@sover.net
Dear Luanne,
I have not yet seen another reply to your posting ( which I have
quoted below in full in case any others may have discarded it or misplaced
it) which I think and feel is one of the more profound and insightful
postings shared on Talisman since I have been a subscriber. Thank you for
sharing the "in-sights" from your journey of healing.
I urge others to read it and reread it for clues as to the "depth" dynamic
of what it is we are trying to "access" or get ahold of in terms of our
inherent human/spiritual nature. Unless one has started to access the
unconscious aspect of one's self by way of healing - using all the potency
of one's own determination alongside the powerful prayers given to us for
purposes of healing - it is difficult to understand the place you are
speaking from.
If one does not urge him/herself on in this task, however, crisis will
force the issue.
Of course, the crisis is already upon us. Will fears keep us up in our
heads and away from the underlying pain? - the energy we need to make it
through is being tied up in the futile attempts our bodies use to fend off
the pain. It is in embracing the pain, however, that we find the way to
release the energy used to defend ourselves -as you have intimated -
against loss of control. As with all things paradoxical in this mysterious
universe, by giving in we don't lose, we transform!
Without change through self-transformation, individuals tend to judge
the Faith, its Institutions, and other people, for example, with only the
tools of an unawakened lower human nature. The knowledge we of necessity
must seek, in order to grow, is pointed to in your posting. I hope many
Talisman readers will look at it again and ponder what you are telling us.
Luanne, are you a subscriber to the Baha'i-Intuition mailing list? If
not, may I have your permission to post your message on that list? There
may be a number of Baha'is interested in this area who subscribe to that
list but not to Talisman. Looking forward to hearing from you. I still
owe you a private response on the Marion Woodman book, which I haven't
gotten to yet.
Baha'i love, your brother, Henry
Luanne, in her posting entitled: Homosexuality, dated 12/14/95 wrote:
>The question I raise with regard to my own struggles to obey Baha'i law is:
>do I believe that Baha'u'llah has a prospective which I do not possess, and
>which is enjoined upon me for the benefit of my soul, or do I make wrong His
>perspective in favor of my own inclinations or for my own comfort. I have
>several friends who are homosexual or bisexual, and my impression of their
>inclinations is that this lifestyle is largely chosen (unconcsciously, for
>the most part) to avoid issues that are highly charged and emotionally very
>uncomfortable. It is easier for them to live this way in order not to have
>triggered much unfinished conflict, usually within their family of origin,
>and in order to support certain viewpoints gathered from such experience,
>such as "Men only want one thing," "So this is how men and women treat
>eachother after the courtship is over," "All women do is try to control
>you," etc. etc. etc. I am not meaning to oversimplify this issue, but in
>my own journey of healing I have encountered again and again distortions in
>my own thinking that subtlely controlled my behavior in ways that I didn't
>for most of my life understand and struggled like a fiend to try to make
>sense of or justify. These attitudes frequently don't even belong to us,
>but are broadcast in the very gestures of our parents and those around us
>when we are young. Until we uncover them and see their power over us, we go
>on making choices (usually unhealthy) that are based upon the operation of
>these distortions. Burl's posting addressed this very clearly. I am not
>saying that this is universally the case, but our family issues are at the
>root of most of our pathologies. It seems that these inclinations can occur
>very early in life, apparently as some natural state. Are not most of our
>idiosyncracies some sort of defense mechanism or coping skill formed in
>response to unpleasant or even unbearable situations? Supposing them to be
>our inherent qualities makes little more sense to me than supposing that we
>live many lifetimes in order to explain these character and personality traits.
>
>As far as genetics are concerned, I am no authority on this any topic,
>except my own search. So from the perspective that God tests his servants,
>perhaps even this genetic fluke, this accident of chromosomal arrangement is
>every bit His Will as the tests that all of us endure. I have my own set
>that I have spent years sorting through and continue to struggle with, and
>by and large, although the pain involved in facing my own history has been
>and is from time to time excruciating, I can see these events as a mercy in
>the long run - they have challenged me, have required that I surrender my
>will again and again and again in order to survive the onslaught of this
>world. We all suffer, we are all brought to our knees in one way or
>another, because most of us if given the choice would never choose this path.
>
>Someone mentioned chakras. This is one of those phenomena (like gravity),
>the source of which is unseen. I believe that they are qute literal, and
>consistent in their properties. The second chakra, the sex chakra is the
>center of sensuality and creativity. If there are distortions around issues
>such as whether or not we were touched as children, whether that touch was
>safe and appropriate, whether our creativity was encouraged, whether we were
>allowed some expression of that creativity, or had our need for touch and
>closeness validated, whether we experienced physical pleasure, or whether
>all of these healthy aspects of ourselves were suppressed/denied/kicked out
>of us, then disortions will arise in our interactions with others, in our
>abilty to relate in healthy ways to others. Sexual abuse and domestic
>violence does much to destroy our ability to relate to our own creative
>urges and yearnings, let alone our sensuality. The example of (was it you,
>David?) the woman who mistook her spritual yearning for sexual attraction is
>only one configuration of how this can play itself out in our interactions
>with other human beings.
>
>John Upledger, DO, founder of the Upledger Institute has done years of
>medical research (Michigan State University) on the nature of fascial
>restrictions and restrictions within the craniosacral membrane itself. He
>has discovered that the nature of all these restrictions is energetic, the
>sources of which can be physical, emotional, or spiritual in nature, yet
>they all manifest physically: at times as simple tissue restrictions, but
>they can ultimately lead to diseases in the organs and tissues (utilizing
>the meridian system) if the restriction remains over a period of time. In
>other words, the roots of many diseases are energetic (vibrational) in
>nature. Imagine that. Uncovering the traumatic source of the restriction
>can be accessed directly throught the tissue (it has memory and is
>consciously accessible). He has documented case after case of physical and
>psychological symptoms (as well as many learning disabilties) that have
>responded positively to Craniosacral Therapy and Somato Emotional Release
>techniques. He is no New Age cook or weirdo, but an osteopathic physician
>who is pioneering methods of treating "hopeless" or "inexplicable
>(psychosomatic)" conditions. The medical community is just beginning to
>give ear. Perhaps we need more time to uncover the various causes of
>homosexuality and need not rush to conclude that all the "scientific"
>evidence is in.
>
>I, too, have known several people who decided that they were homosexual,
>only to change their minds years later. With the current state of
>male/female relationships in this culture it is tempting to bag it and adopt
>an alternative lifestyle, gathering evidence along the way for why you are
>doing what you are doing. Again, I mean no offense, nor do I mean to making
>sweeping generalizations, or to take lightly the suffering that accompanies
>the decision or conclusion that one is gay. But it seems that the standard
>of modern Western culture is being upheld as the Truth in many postings and
>I have to question this. I have no idea what it is like to be a homosexual,
>I have not suffered the prejudices and inequities that homosexuals have
>suffered. Can we trust the Western Medical model any more than the mores of
>our society, that model being the product of this society? I long for
>something more.
>
>Loving Regards,
>LuAnne
Henry W. Miller
Martinez, California,U.S.A.
hwmiller@ccnet.com
hwmiller@eworld.com
510-372-0709
=END=
From: kseiden@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Subject: Re: Darwin on the Brain...
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 23:31:40 -0600 (CST)
Dear Robert you wrote:
>
> "This,
> argument,however, rests primarily on Faith rather than empirical verifiability
> and will tend to carry little weight with individuals outside of the
> Faith."
>
> Response: One can't bend reality so that it suits the candy-floss fantasies
> of a bewildered humanity.
Well I suppose the answer from our cynical biologist would be "One can't bend
reality so that it suits the candy-floss explanations of your theology". The
crux of the issue, I think, is to distinguish between those questions whose
answers can be determined experimentally (e.g. the physical relation of
species to one another) in principle and those issues, who by their very
nature, are not accessible to experimental proof (e.g. the existence of
God).
>
> The '"hard" response from your average biologist' is a pretty cynical
> position. Why accord it any real value?
>
> If we accept humanity in a foetus then, logically, why should be not accord
> humanity to our ancestor who looked like a possum?
Very Simple. The (physical) potential of a human foetus to become a
(morphologically) recognizable human being can be verified quite easily by
experimental means (e.g. genetic testing). The physical potential for a
possum to "become" human is demonstrably nil.
>
> I yawn, actually. How many times does it need to be stated that the Baha'i
> conception of science is not limited to empiricism...before it really sinks
> in.
It is not clear to me that empiricism (in the tradition of Hume) and empirical
validation (i.e. validation by repeated experience of multiple individuals)
are the same...I believe the latter is fully consistent with the
principles of the Faith.
Respectfully,
Ken
=END=
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 23:48:07 -0600
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: Steve Jordan
Subject: Hello, Talisman
Hello All:
I have been lurking here on Talisman for the past few weeks, and realized
that I need to introduce myself.
I am 41, married, with a 10 year old daughter and a five year old son. I
live in a suburb of Houston (Friendswood) where I work for a large
aerospace company providing support for NASA. How I got in the aerospace
business after spending 10 years as a professional musician is still a
mystery to many (including myself), but here I am nonetheless.
On the spiritual front, I was a Baha'i for about five years, but upon
moving to the Houston area, pretty much fell away from the faith. I
currently attend a Unitarian Universalist church (I think one of my posts
from SRB found its way to Talisman a while back, so forgive me if you've
already heard this). I ended up here after pulling together a lesson on the
Baha'i faith for the Jr.Hi UU class I help teach. I am now in a quandary
since in researching this lesson, I came to the conclusion that I am more
in tune with the Baha'is than with UUism. Thus I am taking a good look at
my own spiritual path/belief system and reinvestigating the Baha'i Faith.
For Anton: Hi. Good to see you made it here.
For Mark Foster: I see that you teach at JCCC. This is where I really
discovered the Baha'i Faith. Upon quitting the music business in 1983, I
returned to school - first stop JCCC (a wonderful school, BTW). My uncle,
Dan Jordan, had been murdered about two years prior. I had heard that he
was Co-Chairman of the NSA (though I had no idea what that was), and the
only newspaper account I had of his murder said that an Iranian group had
claimed credit for the deed (to my knowledge, it has never been solved).
So, there I was wandering around the JCCC library one day, when I happened
upon the religion section. I saw the book "Baha'i World Faith" and decided
to see what Dan Jordan may have died for. I opened the book to the twelve
principles and my search began. I took that book home and read it, the
whole time thinking that this is what I had always believed, but had never
seen it laid out like this before.
Eventually I found a class being offered through the Communiversity (a sort
of Free University in Kansas City) called "One Planet, One People, Please."
I thought the title sounded Baha'ish, and sure enough it was a class at the
KC Baha'i Center. Mary Rowe taught the course and did a wonderful job of
introducing me to the history and tenets of the Baha'i Faith. BTW, if she
is still around, please tell her hello for me. I declared about a year or
so later, and remained fairly active until relocating to Houston in 1988.
There you have it. Probably more than you wanted to know, but far be it
from me to go against Talisman customs and Maori etiquette. I look forward
to hearing from you all.
Regards,
Steve
jordan@iapc.net
=END=
From: "Mark A. Foster"
Subject: Evolution
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 23:47:05 -0600 (CST)
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Talismanians -
I have read with interest recent posts which attempt to reconcile
remarks made by the Master to L.C. Barney with classical evolutionary
theory (Darwin and Spencer). I doubt that the issues involved will be
resolved all at once. The harmony of science and religion, as envisioned
in the Baha'i teachings, has not yet been realized. Once this unity of
thought has been achieved, humanity will begin to see reality from an
entirely different standpoint. Moreover, I do not think that we have
any way of knowing with certainty what new insights and methodologies
this remarkable development will produce. IMV, it is far too premature
at this point to make any definitive statements.
Although I appreciate the views of those who argue that there is a
biological link between hominid and animal evolution (whether man from
the animals or the animals from man), I have difficulty making this
connection from a Baha'i standpoint. The animal is emanated by the
animal spirit (the purposeful power of sensation), the vegetable spirit
(the purposeful power of growth), and the mineral spirit (the purposeful
power of cohesion). It lacks the human spirit and, consequently, does
not have the ability, potentially or otherwise, to engage in rational
thought. The animal is also absent the spirit of faith and, as a result,
cannot receive the divine blessings which come to a being who has
consciously recognized the inner evidences of divine Revelation.
To my understanding, the human spirit and the spirit of faith are
the twin purposeful powers of the soul. These powers, and their various
manifestations, are what distinguishes humanity from the animal kingdom.
Although man is outwardly like the higher mammals, he is, from a
spiritual POV, able to function on an altogether different plane of
existence - the spiritual Kingdom revealed.
As I see it, the similarity between man and the apes is a sign of
the divine ordering of creation. It teaches us about the purposefulness
of evolution - a dimension of science which is unattainable using the
normal tools of empirical research. It is, IMHO, one of the hidden, or
esoteric, implications of the evolutionary process.
And could the similarity between man and the apes also be a symbol
vehicle for our human potentialities? IOW, despite the many genetic
similarities between ourselves and other primates, it is only man who
can develop civilization. Seeing what is, in some ways, man minus his
spiritual substance in these creatures can both remind us of the need to
develop our minds and hearts and teach of about the instinctual,
conditioned beings we would be if we did not possess the capacity for
human socialization.
Bright blessings,
Mark
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion (and 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 in the diversity of His creation.
=END=
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 19:05:02 +1200
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: Re: standing by my words
Dear Linda,
Call me a perverse dog eating ant with a long nose and a short
black springy bark if you like, but I stand by my words also. (Though, I
liked what John wrote : "Thus, AB's statements onevolution should be read
not literally as corrections to a particular scientific theory but as
affirmations that scientific truth must be understood in the context of a
spiritual view of the universe.") But,alas, my conscience is now
instructing me to be silent. I sincerely wish you, Ken and Rob (et al) the
greatest contentment with your views...
Robert.
PS Re:
And, I trust you read the posting from Juan of
>Abdu'l Baha's talk in New York.
No. But then I didn't read Juan's response to the Research Dept. letter
re. Socrates either. I'd like to read both sometime. I am also waiting for
Chris Buck to supply a full version of the House letter he has recently
used to re-assert his view that there were Manifestations of God in the
Americas.
=END=
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 19:10:59 +1200
To: kseiden@casbah.acns.nwu.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: Re: Darwin on the Brain...
Dear Ken,
>Very Simple. The (physical) potential of a human foetus to become a
>(morphologically) recognizable human being can be verified quite easily by
>experimental means (e.g. genetic testing). The physical potential for a
>possum to "become" human is demonstrably nil.
Oh: did you find THAT *possum* already, and test it?
Robert (about to play possum)
=END=
From: "Mark A. Foster"
Subject: Hello, Talisman
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 01:23:16 -0600 (CST)
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Steve -
What a beautiful and spiritually moving story. Thank you. As you may
know, your uncle, Dan Jordan, was one of the closest people to one of
spiritual mentors, Marian Lippitt. His ANISA project (an alternative
educational model) was based largely on Marian's work in the science of
reality which she later incorporated into her Ph.D. dissertation. Dan
himself was much loved by the American Baha'i community. You certainly
have a proud heritage, Steve.
Thanks for the kind words about my employer . Johnson County
Community College is, supposedly, one of the five best community
colleges in the country, and it consistently turns up at the top of the
list on almost all comparative indices. That was part of the draw for me
from my previous teaching position in Georgia. But Johnson County,
Kansas, is one of the five wealthiest counties in the U.S., so it can
afford to put a lot of money into the college! It is nice to know that
someone came into the Faith through JCCC. Unfortunately, there are, to
the best of my knowledge, no Baha'i students currently at the college.
Communiversity is a wonderful continuing education force in the KC
area. Of course, most larger cites I am familiar with have similar
programs. The majority of the courses tend to be geared toward to
personal and career development, neo-paganism, and new-ageism. However,
once in a while, someone, like Mary (who is still very much involved in
Baha'i activities here), will offer a course in the Faith. A friend of
mine is now teaching a course in the Unification Church through
Communiversity.
Best wishes to you, Steve, in your continuing search!
Warm 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) *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
___
* UniQWK #2141* The manifested Unity of God in the diversity of His creation.
=END=
Date: 16 Dec 95 23:38:28 U
From: "Dan Orey"
Subject: My Favorite Book
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: SBirkland@aol.com, 103275.1472@compuserv.com, slynch@interserv.com,
jfmalaret@ucdavis.edu, Kkonline@aol.com
Subject: Time: 8:45 PM
OFFICE MEMO My Favorite Book Date: 12/16/95
Citizens of Planet Talisman,
I would like to recommend the following book, whose original is in Dutch (I can
find the name of the original if needed). The English translation is:
Pronk, P. (1993). _Against nature? Types of oral argumentation regarding
homosexuality_.Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co. Forward by Hendrick
Hart.
Pim Pronk's work is probably the finest example of scholarship related to the
moral issue that we Baha'is face re: sexual orientation. In this book, Pronk
skillfully asks,
"What could be done to activate the churches into more actively considering a
practice of visible love for homosexuals such that homosexuals themselves would
feel accepted?"
This is an essential question for Baha'is as well. Hart in the forward states,
"No major denomination that condemns homosexual practice shows that its
professed love for homosexuals is real by actively protesting the persecution
of homosexuals. The church here runs the risk of being fairly accused of
injustice by neglecting to advocate on behalf of its homosexual members. It is
widely agreed that cultural situations of this kind, where members of a society
are condemned because they are different, exist as a result of a widespread
prejudice and ignorance rooted in irrational anxiety. It is also widely agreed
that only education, information, and advocacy can change this situation. " p.
xiv
later Pronk states,
"Sexual justice calls us to acknowledge and respect the diversity of age,
gender, sexual orientation, color, body size and shape, families, and custom.
Such diversity enriches rather than diminishes our life together. Justice
requires us to promote such diversity. It questions elitist cultural
assumptions and stereotypes. In the church, the division is not between
homosexuals and heterosexuals, between men and women, or between white and
black, but between justice and injustice" (Pronk p. 99).
The book jacket states that Pim Pronk teaches dogmatics and philosophy at
Hogeschool Holland, an affiliate of Vrije Universitet, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
His doctorates are in in biology and theology.
regards, Daniel
=END=
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 00:32:15 -0700
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: hwmiller@ccnet.com (Henry Miller)
Subject: Re: Hello, Talisman
Dear Steve Jordan, you wrote, among other things:
>>Hello All:
Welcome. Interesting that you are(were) a musician like your uncle
(Rhodes scholar, music) Dan.
I declared as a Baha'i while living in Chicago in December, 1964, while
attending Chicago Theological Seminary. I spent my very first Fast with
your uncle Dan and his lovely wife, Nancy, and little (at that time)
Melissa when they lived at the Univ. of Chicago.
I remember those cold, wintry mornings - walking from around 57th
Street, across the Midway, with the moon lighting my way, to Dan and
Nancy's place. We shared breakfast and prayers.
I still have the copy of Prayers And Meditations by Baha'u'llah which
Dan and Nancy gave to me: "For Henry, on this great occasion - with a
thousand greetings! Love from