Talisman Bahai Archives Dec. 24-27, 1995
Dec. 24-27, 1995
Talisman emails received 12/24/95
---------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 1995 23:50:46 -0700 (MST)
From: Sadra
To: Robert Johnston
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RJ's Crocodile Tears (Re: Outrage..)
Robert, what's this victim-martyr act your playing now? You sent your
message to Talisman itself with the subject heading to "majordomo" and
not an unsubscribe message to majordomo. What kind of nincompoops do you
take us for? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the 4th time
(February, June, September and now) that you've decided to unsubscribe
from Talisman in "self"-righteous indignation, only to come back a few
weeks, or a few days, later, making tacit apologies and pleading for
moderation, only to jump back in and resume your acrimonious vitriolics
again with full force. Come on, man! Grow up! We weren't born yesterday,
you know! Unfortunately it seems some of our new subscribers have bought
into Robert's story hook-line-and-sinker. People, for the love of God,
stop being such gullible push-overs.
You, Robert, constantly hold peoples loyalty to the Baha'i Faith
contemptuously in question, insinuating in the strongest possible terms
that they're Covenant Breakers etc., imposing your arrogant
self-righteous views on everybody on the list, and then turn around with
this proverbial song and dance and have the gaul to say that you didn't
mean it that way. vAghe'an keh yA Abu'l-Fazl! What way _did_ you mean it
exactly? Shall I bring out the violins for your solliloqouy (sp?) ??? ;-)
And stop playing the victim, for God sakes; it doesn't suit your
personality, you cheapen yourself in the eyes of any sensible person of
any intelligence and it is, to say the very least, highly, highly
unflattering of you.
You wanted frank and honesty, you got it!!! And don't waste your time with
any renewed antics, `cause "frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn" ([c] Gone
With the Wind). Consider this my last ever communication with you on any
level. I am disgusted...
Nima (calling Robert's bluff)
p.s. There's saying in EST (a.k.a. The Forum), "The Truth will set you
free, but first it'll p*** you off." Take heed!
---
O God, cause us to see things as they really are - Hadith
"In the mirror of their minds, the forms of transcendent realities are
reflected, and the lamp of their inner vision derives its light from the
Sun of Universal Knowledge" - Secret of Divine Civilization
=END=
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 1995 23:32:13 -0800
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: margreet@margreet.seanet.com (Marguerite K. Gipson)
Subject: Re: RJ's Crocodile Tears (Re: Outrage..)
Sounds like we need hip waders too... not just violins.
Will all this matter in 100 years... I think not.
Margreet, who will spend Christmas reading all of Talisman to understand
all this....
=END=
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 1995 23:35:47 -0800
From: derekmc@ix.netcom.com (DEREK COCKSHUT )
Subject: Talisman Rules .????
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Dear Talismanians .
Taking a short break from the session I am involved in at Bosch to
discover warfare has broken out on our esteemed List . Please a liitle
more kindness a little less anger . The only person who has the right
to take a person off Talisman other than the person themselves , is the
List owner John Walbridge , Talisman is not a democracy . We are all
supposed to behave as intelligent human beings with a sense of decorum
and not insult each other .
Please go gentle with Love in your hearts for the Twin Blessed Ones .
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
=END=
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 02:18:37 -0700
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: mcfarlane@upanet.uleth.ca (Gordon McFarlane)
Subject: Re: unsubscribing
Brent wrote:
>By way of information and not of encouragement, to unsubscribe from
>Talisman -- folks please take note so that John doesn't need to do it
>manually for us
>send the message:
>unsubscribe talisman
>to:
>majordomo@majordomo.indiana.edu
>I think that's the ticket.
A better ticket seems to be to send the message to . . .
Majordomo@majordomo.ucs.indiana.edu
I have subscribed and unsubscribed on several occasions with out much delay
time and without having had the message posted to all list members. I
haven't got a clue what the "ucs" is for but it seems to hasten the process.
While I'm here I wish to add
1. That while I think it's unfortunate anyone would feel as though they were
being attacked or invited to leave this list by other members, it seems to
me that the so called controversy which has our friend R.J. (who's postings,
for the most part, I rather enjoy reading) hesitatingly standing at the exit
with the door wide open and the cold air pouring in, has been blown out of
all proportion. I have become accustomed to more "hostile" debate during 14
years of assembly service than I have seen here on Talisman. Please Robert,
make up your mind one way or the other and shut the door. I't cold in here.
2. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that this list is
owned and operated by John Walbridge and that it's John W. who, from time to
time, reminds us of the rules. It seems innappropriate to me that any one
other than John Walbridge should suggest that another member, (guest) should
be delisted. I don't buy this "impersonality of cyberspace" business and
feel that the same rules of common curtesy should apply here as elsewhere.
3. As for actual or inferred ad hominem attacks, sometimes perhaps the best
and most effective response is no response. Retaliation = escalation.
4. And thanks to all of you! My time on Talisman is time well spent and it
has proven to be a valuable tool in deepening my understanding of the Faith.
Gordon (Learned in Blah Blah) McFarlane.
---
Gordon McFarlane e-mail: MCFARLANE@upanet.uleth.ca
Public Access Internet
The University of Lethbridge
=END=
From: Geocitizen@aol.com
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 05:14:26 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: reply from a "gullible push-over"
In what I can only assume is an honest, yet sadly, a self-defeating effort to
curb the resurgence of "acrimonious vitriolics" on Talisman, Nima wrote the
following words (among many others) to Robert Johnston and the list as a
whole:
"Come on, man! Grow up! We weren't born yesterday, you know!
Unfortunately it seems some of our new subscribers have bought
into Robert's story hook-line-and-sinker. People, for the love of God,
stop being such gullible push-overs."
Although Nima generously refrained from referring to me by name, I am the
only one who has posted a message failing to explicitly condemn Robert's
actions since his recent announcement of his intention to withdraw from
Talisman. This seems to bestow upon me the dubious honor of being the most
prominent representative of the gullible push-overs whose existence Nima
posits.
I suppose I should take very seriously the responsibilities that accompany
this position -- and I am sure the participants of Talisman will make every
effort to keep these exalted duties from inflating my ego. :)
But seriously, there is a fatal flaw in this theory, and I hope Nima will
read very carefully what I write next. The issues I am attempting to dredge
out of this mess entirely transcend the issue of Robert Johnston's true
character and motives. Even if the sinister picture Nima has painted is
completely accurate in its depiction of Robert's aims and methods, I consider
that to be, quite frankly, none of my damn business.
Nowhere in the Writings of this Faith have I found a single word even
suggesting that I could ever know the true spiritual worth of Robert as a
person, much less anything telling me that I am entitled to turn my back on
his ideas and exile him from the community of thought in which I participate.
I am the first to admit that I lack deep scholarship in the Writings.
Nevertheless, I am confident in my conviction that none of them contain
words that might be paraphrased like this: "... of course, the commandments
that we love one another and overlook one another's faults are merely general
statements of an unattainable ideal. If you have tried really, really hard
for a really, really long time to get along with one of the friends, and he
still seems like a real jerk to you, you are perfectly justified in cutting
him out of your life, silencing his voice in the community, and publicly
vilifying his character..."
Leaving behind my ham-handed attempt at subtle irony, let me state this
directly: the argument in which Nima has squared himself against Robert is
of no concern to me whatsoever, and I take neither side in it. I assume both
sides to have the best possible motives (although not necessarily the best
possible expressions of their motives :) not because I am naive and gullible,
but because I am convinced that assuming the best motives is the most
constructive approach to this situation.
Even if the worst accusations are true, and Robert really has been
consciously attempting to disrupt this list and generally cause trouble --
even if it were possible to know this beyond doubt, which in fact is beyond
the power of human knowledge -- still, I can see no way to justify condemning
him, because it is definitely true beyond question that redemptive
transformation is among the central themes, if not *the* central theme, of
the Baha'i message when applied to individual life, and forgiveness of
injuries is the central theme of how we should conduct our relationships with
one another. There is only One who has any business condemning anybody; the
rest of us have no such right. Both toward Robert and toward Nima, the only
attitude I can justify is an open heart and an open mind.
Until our relationships toward one another reflect this revolutionary idea,
how can we possible hope to even begin healing the deeply scarring wounds on
the souls of the billions who have yet to hear of Baha'u'llah's healing
Message?
It is toward this lofty goal that I call our discussions to turn. I know
that all of us are capable of turning our backs on the vitriol that has
filled this list in the past. There is absolutely no doubt that we *can* do
it. The only question is: *will* we?
With the most _loving_ slap of the gauntlet across all of your faces,
Kevin
=END=
From: Kavikpakak@aol.com
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 10:06:40 -0500
To: Kavikpakak@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Will of God
Dear folks on Talisman,
Please forgive the use of the reply feature, (if this shows up on
Talisman with the original subject listed, it will seem to make no sense).
Until I talk to a computer- knowledgeable human, this seems to be the only
way my messages get though.
I am asking for thoughts, passages, insights, ANYTHING about the will
of God.
Last fall, and again this summer, I actually left my town, which is extremely
rural in setting, and not connected by road to anywhere in the universe, and
I got to talk to some Baha'is (other the Baha'is I know and love very well
here at home). I was presented with a concept of the Will of God that I just
can't seem to get, even though it makes sense of the passage, "All are His
servants and all abide by His bidding". Here is the concept, (which I fear
may be blindingly obvious to all but me): that the Will of God is anything
that happens to you, and the way you react to anything that happens to you.
I'm having a hard time reconciling this with free will. And any
association with predestination for specific mortals is just annoying.
So, please, any thoughts, etc. will be most greatly appreciated.
And I will get to fly out to a Baha'i function next week, so I may even come
back with some new thoughts on this. Meanwhile...I appear to be in the realm
of the clueless on this one.
Pakak
P.S. If it helps folks to ponder any answers, I am a Baha'i and have only
been a subscriber to Talisman for about a week.
=END=
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 11:28:56 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: help
Where is Sheila Banani when we need her?
sAmAn
=END=
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 09:24:51 -0800
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: margreet@margreet.seanet.com (Marguerite K. Gipson)
Subject: Cyber-Fights... Gees...
Once upon a time, I got into a *fight* with the neighbor girl down the
street... I was 10 OK.... I just told her I did not like her anymore and no
longer wanted to be her friend. --forget the reason now.
When my mom found out, all she asked me was what would I do in the next
world when Abdul'Baha asks me about my friend. My retort was somethink
like well I did not like her any more because she was _____________ ( I
forgot, insert something...) well, Abdul'Baha will want an answer to that,
as we are to love our enemies, as in the Tablet of Ahmad, *Be thou as a
flame of fire to My enemies and a river of live eternal to My loved ones...*
Somehow, I had to become friends with her again, but later like weeks, her
family moved with no warning... There was wisdom and justice at work.
Never heard from, or about ever again.
Just a thought in this Christian and Jewish Season of Joy, Happiness, and
Peace.
Happy Kwanza, Merry Christmas, Happy Hannakkah
Margreet
=END=
From: michelem@s2.sonnet.com
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 09:25:57 -0800
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: House interpreting the Text
>Michelle, please give an example of where you feel that the House has
>interpreted the sacred Text.
>Thanks
>Brent
>
Every time it inserts (UHJ) after the word Guardian, it is interpreting
text. The UHJ is not the Guardian.
By claiming the Huq'u'llah, which was intended for the Guardian, it is
interpreting text.
Many of the "commentaries" added to the official translation of the Aqdas
are interpretations of text.
Michelle
=END=
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 12:03:24 -0700 (MST)
From: Sadra
To: Geocitizen@aol.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: New Age Therapy (Re: reply from a "gullible push-over")
Dear Kevin--
Thank you for your passioned dismissive, but, honestly, you have more than
proven my case about gullible push-overs. I make no apologies; I meant every
word of it! Some of us have been here for almost a full year and have
repeatedly been subjected to the vitriol of the said person, where
charges and insinuations of covenant breaking and harboring motivations
of leadership to the Baha'i community have been continually leveled again
and again. Now, let me ask you, is this person a Hand of a Cause, CBC, the
collective body of the Universal House of Justice or the embodiment of
the Will of God where such judgements are being made in public and with
complete impunity? This is unacceptable on any level -- enough is enough!
You are new here and are more than obviously not party to all the facts
and occurences, but we are! Furthermore what you are doing is
aggrandizing this persons wilfull attention-seeking on the list. Cut it
out!! In other settings this is called being an accessory (sp?) to a deed.
Forgive me, but the Baha'i Faith I believe in says not to make the
Faith the plaything of the ignorant and that unity is the appearance of
justice amongst men. Sorry, but I'm really getting sick and tired of all
this fluffy New Agey humanistic psych nonesense about forgiving any Tom,
Dick and Harry that comes along with perverted intentions bent on getting
away with murder and is finding willing participants in his/her scheme who
are letting him/her go scott-free in the name of forgiveness. I was not
under the impression that the Baha'i Faith is supposed to be about some
kind of collective New Age therapy session where, no matter how heinous
the deed, flackey, and usually insincere, offers of unconditional
forgiveness etc., are being made. I was tought the virtue of accountability
and responsibility as being the summum bonum's of life.
You say my post was self-defeating; you are fully entitled to your
opinion. I see it as making a once-and-for-all stand about what is right
and am not about to let those who insist on employing colorful euphemisms
justify other peoples longstanding record for malicious slander and turn the
perpetrator into a victim.
Regards,
Nima
---
O God, cause us to see things as they really are - Hadith
"In the mirror of their minds, the forms of transcendent realities are
reflected, and the lamp of their inner vision derives its light from the
Sun of Universal Knowledge" - Secret of Divine Civilization
=END=
From: Alethinos@aol.com
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 14:53:14 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: As our energies seep away . . .
This is really quite sad. For so long we've wasted our time here on issues
of secondary importance and now we band together like a pack of hyena to
chase off one fellow who doesn't seem to know when its best to shut up.
And still the critical issue of America's spiritual destiny lies
prostrate. It is really a fascinating study in psychology. A good number of
the members of this list will spend countless hours arguing over trivial
points or being the great defenders (as if there were a need) of liberal
democratic principles and attempting to stretch and twist the Faith to
conform to the latest trend in victim rights advocacy.
But let one post come up that actually tries to bring our attention to the
fundamental cause of all our woes and the silence is crushing. Everytone sits
and blinks. And then, possibly realizing that in order to actually _do_
something about this illness would require not only a significant degree of
sacrifice on their part, but would mean a serious change in their world. No
longer would they be able to simply sit back and post and whine and complain
and lament. They would actually have to come together and DO!
How sad that as a community we can't seem to find a handful of brave
hearted warriors who would arise to see the Guardian's vision become a
reality. How disheartening to see some of its best minds wasting precious
time on arguments best left on the front porch on a warm summer evening.
I imagine if there are any responses to this post they will be as they
have been in the past. Like small dogs nipping at the heel they will be
composed of remonstrates about some personal sacrifices that have been made
and then the big bite - with a husky bark - stating "Well! What is YOUR plan
let's hear your ideas etc., etc."
And I again will have to state that the issue at this moment is not for
each of us to toss out our ideas - as one Counsellor once said to me of
Americans -"Good Lord we don't need more ideas! Give an American a napkin and
fifteen minute and he'll have devised a workable paln to take over the entire
planet! What we need is a unity of thought and a will to see it through
_first_!"
But I doubt we'll get that far. Most those that post here will be content
to go on arguing about the angle of one's outstretched arms during the long
obligatory prayer and how science has now proved that homosexuality _is_
genetically normal and it is heterosexuality that is off the beam . . . and
don't you know just how important THAT is to enkindling the hearts of
millions with the love of God and overcoming hatreds long planted.
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
=END=
From: belove@sover.net
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 95 13:59:14 PST
Subject: RE: Outrage..
To: Robert Johnston ,
talisman@indiana.edu, 748-9178@mcimail.com
I felt the uproar which ended with Robert slamming the door had a
deeper level. Here is my hunching on it.
On Sun, 24 Dec 1995 13:48:25 +1300 (NZDT) Robert Johnston wrote:
The Writings make it clear that all
>genuine human stations are stations of servitude, and not of
personal
>exaltation.
I have been saying that this thread gets personal and painful.
Maybe this is the spot in it for me.
1) I wish I did (maybe) but I don't think I know how to live in
"servitude" -- it is the deepest struggle of my life as a Bahai.
I think this is where I used to become impatient with people who
spoke of this glibly. I remember reading Scott Peck's last book in
which he said that he is embarrassed by the glibness that he hears in
Road Less Traveled.
Servitude spins me around. I suspect "servitude" is like "humility."
You can't "do" humility. It has to be arrived at through experiences.
(At least that has been my experience.) Probably the same with
servitude.
Kabir Helminski once said to a group of us: When you bow, do you
know what you are bowing to?
When is "servitude" refusing to serve or bow down? When is it
standing up in protest? How do I, a beginner along the path, with
such little discernment, discern?
When do I know which "still small voice" inside of me is the voice of
God?
(2) In the context of a policy of separation of scholarship
>from religion and of the appropriation of stations of distinction,
there is
>-- logically -- progressive movement towards ever darker
manifestations
>of co-partnership with God. This was the trend which I wished to
indicate.
>Really, I was being rhetorical and provocative in saying that Juan
would
>next be after the Guardianship. In my heart, I feel that this
cannot be
>literally true.
Robert, I suspected that you were stating the mature implications of
a nascent trend, but the tone and manner suggested you saw it already
in place.In other words, I read the discussion on this issue as
emerging in a very "either/or" and un-nuanced manner.
So I believe this is one of those issues which, as humans living in
an imperfect world, we have yet to learn how to hold in tension and
balance --Wasn't this the meaning of the tight rope walker at the
introduction to Nietzsche's Thus Spake Zarathustra.
It is the same issue as in my first point: How can I know with my own
knowing and not that of another and still be in submission to the
Will of God? This has to be Valley Four, already, a stage certainly
beyond me.
And, if we are all wandering in Vales one thru three, how are we
going to treat each other?
it was only a matter of time before the forces of perversity
>would encircle me and and seek to slay me with their envious swords.
Now
>we have reached this situation. I am departing and there's Alison
throwing
>rocks at my back. How could not not but bring her endless and
enduring
>shame? What has she contributed? So little. So very little. And
now
>this. May God forgive her, and the others, and me also.
>
>
>Robert.
>
>
It does sound like you feel terribly betrayed and cast out, hurt and
reviled even though you meant only to defend the Highest Principles.
It's hard to fault you for lashing out, although I wish there were
other ways for you to register your protest.
Love
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 12/24/95
Time: 13:59:15
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
=END=
From: belove@sover.net
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 95 16:32:56 PST
Subject: Merry Christmas. God Bless you All.
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Thank you dear friends for a wonderful party.
Love from
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 12/24/95
Time: 16:32:56
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
=END=
From: belove@sover.net
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 95 16:42:40 PST
Subject: RE: New Age Therapy (Re: reply from a "gullible push-over")
To: Sadra , talisman@indiana.edu
On Sun, 24 Dec 1995 12:03:24 -0700 (MST) Sadra wrote:
This is unacceptable on any level -- enough is enough!
I'm really getting sick and tired of all
>this fluffy New Agey humanistic psych nonesense about forgiving any
Tom,
>Dick and Harry that comes along with perverted intentions bent on
getting
>away with murder and is finding willing participants in his/her
scheme who
>are letting him/her go scott-free in the name of forgiveness.
I see it as making a once-and-for-all stand about what is right
>and am not about to let those who insist on employing colorful
euphemisms
>justify other peoples longstanding record for malicious slander and
turn the
>perpetrator into a victim.
Nima,
In defense of humanistic psychology, please.
Forgiving someone does not mean forgiving their actions.
I agree that much of Robert's attacks were out of place, damaging and
needlessly provocative.
I also found his name-calling distasteful.
But I do not believe that justifies (key word) returning his behavior
in kind. His personal attacks do not justify your personal attacks.
Personal attacks are out of line, period.
He is as much a victim of attacks from you as you are from him.
The challage is to maintain our collectedness.
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 12/24/95
Time: 16:42:41
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
=END=
From: belove@sover.net
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 95 16:48:00 PST
Subject: FW: RE: As our energies seep away . . .
To: talisman@indiana.edu
On Sun, 24 Dec 95 16:34:51 PST belove@sover.net wrote:
>
>On Sun, 24 Dec 1995 14:53:14 -0500 jim harison wrote:
>>
>>
>> This is really quite sad. For so long we've wasted our time here
>on issues
>>of secondary importance and now we band together like a pack of
>hyena to
>>chase off one fellow who doesn't seem to know when its best to shut
>up.
>>
>
>
>
>jim, I believe that learning to resolve these small differences is
>only the beginning of what we have to learn to bring unity.
>
>Your constant comment that we should ignore or suspend or leave
>behind these, as you call them "secondary issues" suggests that you
>do not find "worthy" these problems we have to solve.
>
>But I suggest these are small tests and preparation for the big
ones.
>Skipping over these matters will not prepare us. I think we have
>first to learn to take care of our own and these annoying problems
>are nothing compared to the big stuff ahead and yet, we can't find
>answers to these small ones.
>
>I don't agree with your call here.
>
>
>Philip
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------
>Name: Philip Belove
>E-mail: belove@sover.net
>Date: 12/24/95
>Time: 16:34:52
>
>This message was sent by Chameleon
>-------------------------------------
>Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
>Einstein
>
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 12/24/95
Time: 16:48:00
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A. Einstein
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 95 11:10 GMT+1300
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: Alison & Steve Marshall
Subject: justice and the covenant
Nima said: "I see it as making a once-and-for-all stand about what is right
and am not about to let those who insist on employing colorful euphemisms
justify other peoples longstanding record for malicious slander and turn the
perpetrator into a victim."
I think Nima has got it in one.
This may seem to many of you as a big fight that really doesn't become a
bunch of Baha'is, but this is not a cat fight on the side walk. This is THE
issue, it is the issue in our communities as well, and the Talisman
community is playing out a recreation of the drama. Until we are able to
agree on what justice is, we will never build communities.
I agree with Nima that we have the impression that the "Baha'i Faith is
supposed to be about some kind of collective New Age therapy session where,
no matter how heinous the deed, flackey, and usually insincere, offers of
unconditional forgiveness etc., are being made. I was tought the virtue of
accountability and responsibility as being the summum bonum's of life." As I
mentioned earlier, this one is a classic for situations of family violence.
It also crops up when a privileged male in a community is acting out.
Look again at the penalties in the Aqdas. We should spend more time looking
after victims, and not so much time worrying about why offenders commit
crimes.
On the other hand, when we Baha'is get a bee in our bonnet about someone -
usually because we have made some extra-judicial assumptions about their
'firmness in the covenant', 'obedience', 'guilt', we slam them for all we're
worth. We make demons where there are none. My 'obedience' has been called
into question on occassions when I have spoken out because I felt strongly
about an issue. Many different Talismanians have posted messages describing
situations they have experienced.
I suspect that we'd be amazed at the number of Baha'is who have been
alienated by the operation of these two processes.
The fact that we can't agree on who should be at the receiving end of the
legitimate operation of the authority of the institutions is proof to me
that we cannot agree on what justice is, and are therefore unable to build
stable, flourishing communities. The issue is not that the institutions
should have such authority - this is not a 'firmness in the covenant' issue,
we are all Baha'is and accept their authority.
We disagree about who should get their butt whipped and why, how we
determine that, and how we deal with the perpetrator.
Alison
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alison and Steve Marshall
Email: forumbahai@es.co.nz
90 Blacks Road, Opoho, Dunedin/Otepoti, Aotearoa/New Zealand
--------------------------------------------------------------
=END=
From: Alethinos@aol.com
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 18:59:53 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: As our energies seep away . . .
A very wise woman who had served the Guardian for years - travelling the
world over for him once told me this:
"Wisdom comes from realizing we don't solve our tests . . . we transend
them."
It is a flight if late 20th century psycho-babble that if A and B disagree
it must be because they simply aren't *communicating* very well - and that if
they would just improve their *listening* skills they would discover this. A
is not *sensitive* to B's needs etc., ad nauseam.
Americans a miracle workers when it comes to avoiding the central issue.
Look at our history. We ignored the race issue (and continue to.) It exploded
in our face, we didn't know what to do. Finally we did what our
materialisitic bent told us to do. We threw huge sums of money at it - felt
good about our war on poverty etc. We passed some laws (which we are past
masters at skirting) and patted ourselves on the back.
Why on earth would anyone, after surveying the field of our social history
allow themselves to think that by following our national obsession of
devouring our own intestines we will sove anything? We have been in this
particular mode for almost a generation now and there is no end in sight.
It isn't a matter of *solving* these little differences dear sir - they
won't let themselves be solved because the egos that project them don't want
a solution they want control. Do we honestly think that unity in the Baha'i
sense is some giant homogenizing process??? We'll all just accept everything
coming from everybody?? Really? Let's think about this. Where are the
boundaries? Do we dare say - after watching the display here on Talisman for
the last year that they are in the Writings? Well we have certainly seen what
a show stopper a quote from one of the Central Figures has been. Yah, that'll
put a cap on it.
We are in the grips of our own axiological disease, just as the Guardian
and the Universal House of Justice has stated, repeatedly. The American
community shows every sign of suffering from what the larger American
community suffers from.
But it really is no wonder. After years of being spoon fed the sweet mush
from those who would wish us to simply maintain the status quo; to not arise
to take our place as the spiritual descendents of the dawnbreakers here in
this country; to never really challenge the foundations of racism and
prejudice and materialism but simply mouth wonderful phrases that have
eventually become nothing more than platitiudes that inspire only those
sitting about their cozy suburban homes content because they had another race
unity picnic and *people of color* showed up (who also happen to be driving
'95 Lexuses.)
We are not going to *solve* anything by pretending. By thinking that the
problem just lies in *communication skills*. That it is all the fault of the
White Male System. That is Them or Her or Him. We are Baha'is - must of us
here. We have a mission. We don't belong to some damn debate team in high
school. We are not a part of some self-help group. We are to be spiritual
physicians. Not federal mediators in a barginning session.
We transend by looking up from the dust. You can tinker with the engine
until the cows come home but unless there is gas in the tank, a key in the
ignition, a foot on the pedal and a hand on the wheel it isn't going anywhere
- no matter how pretty it is.
If we wait until everyone is comfortable, everyone is happy, all the
points of contention are resolved . . . the sun will have long burned to a
black husk. We have to stop deluding ourselves with current definitions of
unity. But you've got to say one thing for it: it has certainly frozen us in
place for a wonderfully long time.
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
=END=
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 17:02:04 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: michelem@s2.sonnet.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: House interpreting the Text
Michelle Ma'ani wrote to Talisman, intimating herself to be a seeker. She
said that she is not a Baha'i, in part because the House of Justice
interprets the sacred Text. I wrote to her about the House, not realizing
at first that she is an active follower of the Covenant-breaker Jamshed
Ma'ani. My guess is that Michelle Ma'ani is related by marriage to Mr.
Ma'ani. Mr. Ma'ani claims to have a revelation direct from God, and was
expelled from the Cause by the Universal House of Justice.
Ms. Ma'ani, you will understand that I cannot discuss any matters related
to the Baha'i Faith with you. Such consultation is prohibited explicitly
by Baha'u'llah, as quoted by the Master in His Last Tablet to America, by
the Guardian, and by the House of Justice. May God aid you. Good Bye,
Brent Poirier
=END=
From: michelem@s2.sonnet.com
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 16:07:31 -0800
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Will of God
>Dear folks on Talisman,
> Please forgive the use of the reply feature, (if this shows up on
>Talisman with the original subject listed, it will seem to make no sense).
> Until I talk to a computer- knowledgeable human, this seems to be the only
>way my messages get though.
> I am asking for thoughts, passages, insights, ANYTHING about the will
>of God.
>Last fall, and again this summer, I actually left my town, which is extremely
>rural in setting, and not connected by road to anywhere in the universe, and
>I got to talk to some Baha'is (other the Baha'is I know and love very well
>here at home). I was presented with a concept of the Will of God that I just
>can't seem to get, even though it makes sense of the passage, "All are His
>servants and all abide by His bidding". Here is the concept, (which I fear
>may be blindingly obvious to all but me): that the Will of God is anything
>that happens to you, and the way you react to anything that happens to you.
>
> I'm having a hard time reconciling this with free will. And any
>association with predestination for specific mortals is just annoying.
> So, please, any thoughts, etc. will be most greatly appreciated.
> And I will get to fly out to a Baha'i function next week, so I may even come
>back with some new thoughts on this. Meanwhile...I appear to be in the realm
>of the clueless on this one.
> Pakak
>P.S. If it helps folks to ponder any answers, I am a Baha'i and have only
>been a subscriber to Talisman for about a week.
The way I've had it explained to me is:
We have free will in the daily operation of our lives. Certain events are
sent in our direction to test us, but the choices we make when faced with
them are ours alone. Not everything that happens to us is as a result of
God's intervention.
The grand scheme of events, the direction the world is moving, is under
God's direction. Humanity really has no choice in this, although it always
tries to tell God what He can or cannot do (but in our Holy texts, is says
that God promised us or said this...). Because His is such a complex system,
seemingly trivial events sometimes turn out to be crucial in God's plans.
As individuals, God knows what choices we will make, but that does not mean
that He is not allowing us to make the choices.
Michelle
=END=
From: michelem@s2.sonnet.com
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 16:30:07 -0800
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: UHJ interpreting text--false accusations
>Michelle Ma'ani wrote to Talisman, intimating herself to be a seeker. She
>said that she is not a Baha'i, in part because the House of Justice
>interprets the sacred Text. I wrote to her about the House, not realizing
>at first that she is an active follower of the Covenant-breaker Jamshed
>Ma'ani. My guess is that Michelle Ma'ani is related by marriage to Mr.
>Ma'ani. Mr. Ma'ani claims to have a revelation direct from God, and was
>expelled from the Cause by the Universal House of Justice.
>
>Ms. Ma'ani, you will understand that I cannot discuss any matters related
>to the Baha'i Faith with you. Such consultation is prohibited explicitly
>by Baha'u'llah, as quoted by the Master in His Last Tablet to America, by
>the Guardian, and by the House of Justice. May God aid you. Good Bye,
>Brent Poirier
>
>Dear Brent
Before you make wild accusations, you should be aware of your facts. I am
not a follower of Jamshid Maani. You have previously made this accusation
, but I was unaware of it before several months had gone by because I did
not have full Internet access. I decided to let the matter ride then, but I
cannot do so again. But your unjust and untrue accusation is the reason I
did not give my name--because it's like a scarlet letter. People
automatically treat me like a Covenant breaker, even though I'm not. Just
because my last name is the same does not mean I am one of his followers.
Jamshid Maani has no followers at this time. People would have to be real
idiots to continue following him.
I am not a Baha'i, nor have I ever been. Yes, I am related by marriage to
Jamshid Maani. So are a lot of people, not all of them were Baha'is, and
not all of them became followers of his. NOt all people with the last name
of Maani were expelled from the Faith, either. In fact, I believe that
there is a woman--a cousin of Jamshid's--who does translation for the UHJ.
Are you going to treat her like a Covenant Breaker?
So, do I have no right to discuss the Faith because of my last name?
Because I am related by marriage to a person who was a Covenant Breaker? I
was not trying to hide facts, I was trying to avoid an unpleasant
situation--which it is obvious I cannot.
I am not a Covenant Breaker, nor am I an enemy of the Faith. I was being
honest in my reasons for not becoming a Baha'i. I thought this was a forum
for open and frank discussion. But perhaps I should add to the reasons the
one that I am branded with a last name which is like poison. How would you
like to be treated like poison when you have done nothing wrong? Is this
Baha'i love?
Michelle
=END=
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 95 20:04:40
From: "Stockman, Robert"
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re[2]: Back to Baha'u'llah??
Juan noted:
>>Thus, with regard to politics, it is very clear that Shoghi
>>Effendi's total ban on politics was not a forever-binding
>>interpretation of Baha'u'llah's principles, but a temporary and
>>ad hoc policy that in many ways runs contrary to Baha'u'llah's
>>own example of defying royal absolutism in the Ottoman Empire and
>>Qajar Iran by calling for parliamentary and democratic
>>governance. Shoghi Effendi as Head of the faith had every right
>>to institute the policy. The question is whether it is
>>permanently binding, and how to determine this. One final
>>arbiter in my view has to be the Writings and intent of
>>Baha'u'llah.
*I am told* that there is a letter of the Guardian stating the policy of
avoiding politics is a "temporary strategy"--I *think* those are the words--and
that the House of Justice can gradually lift the policy. This is what the House
has been doing in the External Affairs work; otherwise it is not clear how the
Baha'i institutions could be involved in such worthy but politically
controversial efforts as getting the U.S. Congress to ratify the genocide
convention.
This helps answer Juan's question "how to determine" whether a decision of the
Guardian and `Abdu'l-Baha are permanent or temporary; they often said so. But
we don't always have all the texts published, and even when they are available
there are so many of them we often have trouble going through them and finding
all the context and principles we need.
I seem to be, at least temporarily, on Talisman. Majordomo apparently received
my complaint that the messages were being "BCC"ed to me twice and fized the
problem, and the messages received before December 22 were removed from my
computer by a colleague in the office so they would not interfere. We'll see
how long my e-mail works. Meanwhile, anyone wishing to write me should use
research@usbnc.org, as it is working fine.
-- Rob Stockman
=END=
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 95 20:05:11
From: "Stockman, Robert"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Disunity
I hesitate to add my own words to this thread, because I think it's a
thread that should disappear. But here goes.
1. It's not clear to me anyone was actually called a Covenant-breaker
(though I have read very few postings lately). I think we can all
agree that calling someone a Covenant-breaker is inappropriate; it
should be left to the House of Justice. But I don't think Covenantal
issues should be ignored or avoided either. And I don't think people
should automatically react to the issue being raised by calling the
person raising the issue a fundamentalist. That's just as
inappropriate and ad-hominem. Covenantal issues, raised intelligently
and clearly, are appropriate on Talisman, just as emotional
discussions of history or other scholarly subjects are inappropriate.
I would add that I suspect Robert Johnson is right if he is arguing
that some of the discussions on Talisman are Covenentally suspect.
But that does not mean someone is a Covenant-breaker, for the latter
involves not just the arguments, but the motivations for making them.
Judging someone's motivations is extremely tricky and judgmental. We
may have private opinions about the motivations of others, but we have
to leave it to institutions to render judgments.
2. Calling someone a "ninkampoop" is as much an ad-hominem attack as
anything else.
3. The biggest problems on Talisman result from emotion, primarily
anger. There is nothing wrong with "passion" if it results in
better-argued, clearer arguments. Otherwise, anger just gets others
upset as well.
-- Rob
=END=
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 95 20:05:12
From: "Stockman, Robert"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Newcastle conference
I doubt this will result in a thread, but maybe it will be more
interesting than many of the exchanges of the last three days.
-- Rob Stockman
---------------------------------------------------------------
Irfan Colloquium Meets in Newcastle-upon-Tyne
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, the birthplace of the Irfan Colloquium,
was the venue of the joint gathering of the eighth Irfan
Colloquium and the semi-annual meeting of the Religious Studies
Special Interest Group of the Association for Baha'i Studies of
English-speaking Europe. The Irfan Colloquium is sponsored by
the Haj Mehdi Arjmand Memorial Fund and the Institute for Baha'i
Studies (Wilmette, U.S.A.). The colloquium took place at the
Department of Religious Studies of Newcastle University on 8-10
December, 1995. Forty-five researchers and others interested in
the academic study of religion and scripture participated in this
joint meeting.
The theme of the program was "Anti-Baha'i Polemic," or
attacks on and criticisms of the Baha'i Faith and ways of responding
to them. The colloquium was opened by two presentations. Dr. Iraj
Ayman briefly described the aims and objectives of the Irfan
Colloquium and then presented a biographical sketch of Haj Mehdi
Arjmand, a well-known scholar-teacher of the Baha'i Faith. He
also summarized the contents of a few of the tablets of Baha'u'llah
and `Abdu'l-Baha and the letters of Shoghi Effendi to Haj Mehdi
Arjmand. Dr. Robert Stockman spoke on "The Limits of Discourse
in the Baha'i Community and their Consequences," focusing on the
needs of any community to define boundaries of internal discourse
in order to preserve its unity. He focused on two issues that
have been raised by non-Baha'i critics of the Faith about its
internal discourse: the treatment of Covenant-breakers and the
existence of prepublication review. Continued development of the
review process to make it more consultation-based will resolve
much of the criticism of it.
Saturday morning Dr. Udo Schaefer spoke about "Anti-Baha'i
Polemic in German-speaking Countries," focusing primarily on a
lengthy attack on the Faith by a Covenant-breaker, Francesco
Ficichia, published in 1981; the work's gradual acceptance as an
impartial scholarly treatment by academics, journalists, and
ecclesiastics; the failure of a policy of ignoring the work; and
the lengthy rebuttal by himself and two other German Baha'is just
published by a scholarly press. Dr. Moojan Momen presented on
the basis of persecution of the Baha'i Faith in Islamic law by
describing different Islamic legal categories (such as believer,
unbeliever, people of the book, and heretic) and noting how those
categories had been used by Muslims and Baha'is in actual court
cases.
Saturday afternoon had four presentations. Dr. Margit
Warburg, a professor of the sociology of religion at the
University of Copenhagen who devotes much of her research to the
sociology of the Baha'i community, spoke about "Religious
Definitions and Religious Polemics: Baha'i in Popular Handbooks
of Religion." She had read about fifty descriptions of the
Baha'i Faith published since 1920 in books describing two or more
religions. She found no handbooks published since World War Two
that described the Baha'i Faith as a sect of Islam; most authors
accept the Baha'i Faith as a "religion"; a few called it a
"sect," but those few were usually not writing against the Faith;
those opposed to the Baha'i Faith were far more likely to refer
to it as a "cult" than neutral scholars.
Dr. Kamran Ekbal then spoke on "Taqiyih and Kitman:
Reflections on the Practice of Dissimulation in the Babi and
Baha'i Religions." Dr. Ekbal noted that the term taqiyih in
Shi'ih Islam covers a range of meanings from denial of one's
faith to mere concealment of it; that the Baha'i prohibition of
denial of one's faith was not fully understood or implemented
until the time of Shoghi Effendi; and that concealment of one's
faith is a form of taqiyih allowed to Baha'is.
Dr. Nichola Towfiq then presented a paper on "E. G. Browne's
Misconceptions." The paper noted various misinformations Browne
presented about Mirza Yahya, such as the statement that the Bab
appointed him His vali (successor) when in fact no such
appointment was made, and described various Azali interpretations
of the Bab's allusions to a future Manifestation of God as
referring to the advent of the next Manifestation in 1501 or 2001
years.
The afternoon closed with Dr. Khazeh Fananapazir's "Mirza
Abu'l-Fadl's Contribution to Baha'i Polemic and Replied to Anti-
Baha'i Polemic." The paper described arguments made in the
Brilliant Proof and the Fara'id.
Sunday morning Stephen Lambden gave a brilliant paper on
"The Position of Mirza Yahya Subh-i-Azal: Some Aspects of Azali
Anti-Baha'i Polemic and Baha'i Apologetics." The paper noted the
critical need to examine the writings of the Bab and Baha'u'llah
in far greater detail, for they will reveal aspects of the
station of Azal usually not considered and will likely make it
clear he was never granted a formal position of successorship by
the Bab; that a life of Yahya and a much more thorough study of
his movement is necessary to correct some misinformation
properly; and that a more thorough examination of Baha'u'llah's
relationship to Yahya will reveal many important details.
The morning closed with Lil Abdo's "Possible Criticisms of
the Baha'i Faith from a Feminist Perspective." She noted that,
ironically, the chief "feminist criticism" of the Faith was
offered eighty years ago by very patriarchal Presbyterian
missionaries, who criticized the slowness of the emancipation of
Iranian Baha'i women. A much more thorough exploration of the
Baha'i conception of sexual equality, and a more frank
exploration of its differences from secular feminism, are crucial
for responding to attacks on the Baha'i Faith's treatment of
women.
During the lunch period some attendees visited the cemetary
where Edward G. Browne is buried. Afterward a short business
meeting was held to discussion possible themes for future
conferences. The theme tentatively selected for 1996-97 is "The
Baha'i Faith and Christianity"; for the subsequent year "The
Baha'i Faith and European Culture" will be considered. Next
year's Irfan Colloquium in Europe will be held in late autumn at
the Acuto Baha'i School in Italy.
The Newcastle conference was characterized by scholarly
rigor, openmindedness, and warmth. The participation of many
participants from Germany, compared to previous years, was most
welcome. The abstract booklet for the colloquium is available
for $3 from the Institute for Baha'i Studies, 1233 Central St.,
Evanston, IL 60091, as are booklets of many previous conferences.
=END=
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 23:03:07 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Therapy, Forgivness and Justice
Dear Friends ,
Having been on talisman for 13 month I must say Nima is quite correct
in the pattern he decribes with respect to Robert's actions in print . I
dont pretend to know his ultimate motivation but I do find his actions
consistently reprehensible .
As for forgivness I can be quite capable of forgiving an individual or
more accurately have compassion for the distress of any soul, the "demons"
which haunt any soul . That out not be confused with, as Nima has remarked ,
some new age mush about forgivness .
The order of the world Baha u llah has pointed out is reared on justice
not forgiveness .Talisman is a form of order and principles of justice need
to govern its operation not principles of forgiveness . forgiveness is
applicable with regard to my personal and private stance towards those whose
actions destroy order . The actions however must still be opposed. And
sometimes as much as I wish otherwise strong measures need to be expressed
and taken to expose and yes remove from our midst someone whose actions are
consistently disruptive and have repeatedly resorted to name -calling .
As I have stated before talisman is an exercise in civil society and as
such people can be requested to move on to a different party if they
consistently dispupt the party . This is not the same thing as "removing "
someone from society . Though that is an option in societies when the
disruption is severe . In the case of voluntary associations of civil society
people always have the option of going elsewhere where the environment is
more suited to their taste . Talisman is not and does not have to pretend to
be for everyone . Whether it is Robert or anyone else . If the form of
discouse and its rules which exist on Talisman are not to someones liking
find another home where the content is more to your liking .
One of the major challenges it seems to me for Bahais is to stop looking
for some place where everey action , every attitude every understanding
somehow has to fit just so . That is really a call for a univocal world . If
we have not figured it out by now there are a lot of voices in the world .
The great challenge of democracy is that it allows all of them expression
.What it does not tolerate and can not accept is the attempt to
"demonize"ones opponents. That does not mean it allows all of then
expresssion at the same time and the same place . Being committed to a
democratic republic I am more than willing to allow a variety of
understandings to be expressed . That does not mean I am willing to listen to
them all . If the noise level is to high such that it interferes with the
reason Talisman was created, which was to create a space in which people who
had scholarly interests could express those interests and explore issues
without being accused of undermining the integrity of the House , cavil at
the Writings or have their devotion to Baha u llah constantly called into
question . There is enough of that in the larger Bahai community. This is an
exercise in creating a civil scoiety within the Bahai community . Anyone who
thinks Talisman is or ought to reflect the dominant understanding current in
the American Bahai community is going to be disappointed . There is nothing
in the nature of Talisman which suggests the paricipants who are here ought
to tolerate anyone attempting to enforce that dominant view . Those so
inclined ought to look elsewhere for an outlet.
In this regard I must support the anger expressed by my friend Nima .
It is in my view the rightous anger expressed by someone who has experienced
and seen others within the Bahai community be subject to the accusations of
lacking firmness etc. There are many of us here who have experienced the
same. In this sense Talisman is a safe haven for all those who are in fact
willing to abide by the rules of reasoned discourse and not resort to ad
hominems as a form of argument . To confuse Nima's anger or reduce it to
equivalency with the anger of one who would impose a literalist view of
scripture and faith upon others and then become more angry when they dont
accept the same is to miss the point and make a serious category mistake .
Nima is right it is time to grow up . Part of that growing up is
realizing that there are many understandings of the Faith of Baha u llah and
the existence of Talisman is proof that they exist. Any attempt to silence
those additional understandings on Talisman by name-calling ought to be
resisted . I am quite glad Nima had the courage, which I lacked, to to
publically do so . Next time I am sure he will consult me first for editing .
:) Having just been thru a situation where my Baha Maiden dialogue
presentation was construed as arrogant and critical of the institutions and
lectured on my necesssity to be:" . . absolutely obedient to the Institutions
at all times " this by a committee, ( no It was not in Omaha or Texas ) I
am not overly sympathetic to anyone assuming Talisman ought to become a
reflection of that attitude and that those who think differently can be
vilified with impunity and that noone ought to say enough is enough .
On that note I am getting ready to attend midnite mass at an Orthodox
Catholic Church It will be a traditional high mass in Latin. I do not
share their theology but I do share their love of God . They are not trying
to convert me and I am not trying to convert them, because of that we have a
marvelous dialogue and can actually respect one another. For me it is an
experience of what an Irfan Republic would be . As Baha u llah says with
respect to Jesus the Christ : " He it is who purified the world. Blessed is
the man who , with a face beaming with light , hath turned towards Him."
Merry Christmas to you all ,
Terry
=END=
[end of 12/24/95 session]
Talisman emails received 12/25/95
---------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 23:46:33 -0800
From: derekmc@ix.netcom.com (DEREK COCKSHUT )
Subject: RE the Question of the House of Justice and the Huququ'llah .
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Dear Talismanians ,
Michelle raised the question that payment of the Right of God from her
understanding was to be made only to the Guardian as her example of
interpretation . I will be happy to forward to Michelle the relevant
material free of charge if she will send me her mailing address.
As quick note : ...... The Huququ'llah should be kept in the custody of
trusted individuals and forwarded to His holy court through the
Trustees of God .
: There is a prescribed ruling for the Huququ'llah . After
the House of Justice hath come into being , the law thereof will be
made manifest , in conformity with the Will of God .
The above two references are from Baha'u'llah .
From Shoghi Effendi dated December 26th 1927. : .....All matters not
specifically provided by Baha'u'llah are to be referred to the
Universal House of Justice .
I believe if you are interested Michelle you will; find that the Right
of God correctly falls under the domain of the House of Justice . Do
let me know if you want the literature .
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 95 01:57:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Michelle Maani's case
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Brent is someone whose words I take very seriously on such
matters. I suggest we wait for John Walbridge's return before
any further communication with Michelle Ma'ani -- John can then
sort the matter out with Wilmette's help. If it turns out that
indeed the specifics of the case are otherwise and she is a true
seeker as claimed, then we will all extend her a warm welcome and
take the discussion from there. But for the next few days, until
John can ascertain the specifics of the case, Brent's advise
seems very prudent to me. Certain principles cannot be
compromised -- protection of the Faith is one of them.
ahang.
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 04:10:05 -0500 (EST)
From: Cheshmak A Farhoumand
To: bahai-discuss@bcca.org
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu, bahai-women@bcca.org
Subject: Goodbye!!
Dear friends, just a quick note to let you know i have unsubscribed for
the next three weeks as i will not be in town and can not possibly read
the hundreds of messages that i am sure will accumulate in the next three
weeks. I will miss reading all your entries and look forward to
subscribing again when i return.
In the meantime, if anyone needs to communicate to me, please send a
message directly to my address as i will not be on the listservice and
will not receive any messages sent through the general address.
Hope you all have a great holiday. i know i will. I am in some need for
mommy's hug therapy.
Love to you all,
Cheshmak Farhoumand
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 04:23:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Cheshmak A Farhoumand
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Majordomo results: unsubscribe (fwd)
Dear friends, i need to unsubscribe from Talisman before i leave and no
matter what i send, it comes back unacceptable. Can someone please let me
know how i can unsubscribe or give me John's e-mail address so i can send
a message to him directly. THanks
Cheshmak
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 04:17:31 -0500 (EST)
From: Majordomo@indiana.edu
To: cfarhoum@osf1.gmu.edu
Subject: Majordomo results: unsubscribe
--
>>>> unsubscribe talisman cheshmak farhoumand
**** unsubscribe: 'cheshmak farhoumand' is not a member of list 'talisman'.
=END=
From: Geocitizen@aol.com
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 05:32:33 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: back to conscience
To my admired fellow-Talismanians Nima, Christopher Buck, and Robert
Stockman,
First, to Nima:
You are still grievously misreading my intentions if you think I am defending
the actions and words of Robert Johnston that you have found reprehensible.
I have been here longer than you think I have, and have seen more of his
postings than you think I have, and yes, many times his approach has
contained unfortunate flaws (as far as my own imperfect perception could
ascertain -- and also by his own public admission). I neither defend the
rightness of his approach in these cases, nor attack the details of his
actions, because I see nothing to be gained for anyone by doing so.
Instead I have sought, and still seek, to transcend the particulars of this
case, rise to the level of principle, and thus gain a greater insight into
the spiritual problems plaguing our communities.
I saw your previous post as well intentioned but self-defeating because in
essence you are opposing vitriol with vitriol, and now you are directing the
same at me, although as far as I can tell I have generated no vitriol myself
(correct me if I am mistaken on the latter point, please).
Robert Johnston has been accused of arguing from authority and claiming
superior knowledge in an attempt to gain others' submission to his views. It
is right to oppose such actions; but ironically, you oppose them by
vehemently ordering me to submit to your superior knowledge as a greater
authority on the character of Robert Johnston than I am. My logical and
moral point here is that if you are right in refusing to submit to him, then
I am also right in refusing to submit to you.
Nima, I sincerely admire your knowledge and character, but must respectfully
refuse to abandon my conscience and obey your orders on this matter.
Does this mean I am taking Robert's "side," as you accuse me of doing? Most
emphatically, NO! It means I am taking the "side" that has both you and
Robert on it. It means I choose to leave this interpersonal battle behind,
because there are far greater battles to be won in the refinement of my own
character and the development of the life of the community -- from the
intellectual life of the relatively small community on Talisman to the
spiritual life of the greater community in which we are all interdependent,
no matter how offended we choose to be at one another.
Second, to Christopher Buck:
The hour was late when I completed my posting of last night, and so
regretfully I neglected to mention the life-giving hope I derived from your
response to my initial effort to begin coaxing a lotus blossom from the mire
of this dispute concerning Robert J.
I heartily agreed with your enumeration of Robert's virtues and the valuable
contributions he has made to the discourse on Talisman. Even if some of his
actions have been unworthy of our support, it would be wrong to ignore his
actions that have been praiseworthy. We would all be outcasts if the
presence of our flaws meant that our virtues had to be ignored.
Also, you were quite correct in assuming that I would not condone attacking
any person's fidelity to the Covenant. Consensus on this principle would be
valuable not only within the Talisman community, but also throughout the
Baha'i community as a whole. Indeed, I think it already exists in some form
in the Writings that instruct us on how to treat one another in our community
relationships. Only the properly-constituted Institutions can determine
whether or not any individual has broken the Covenant, or is "close to"
breaking the Covenant.
Here on Talisman, of course, we have a moderator who is empowered to decide
when any of us has crossed the line from principled discussion of Covenantal
issues into the unacceptable area of personal accusations. I am glad he is
here to do this (most of the time :) because it means I don't have to, and
can focus my energies elsewhere, as I am trying to do now.
Most importantly, Christopher, I thank you for the loving and humble spirit
of your response -- virtues which would serve us well if we incorporated
their strengths more fully into our discussions here. Thank you for helping
to move us in the right direction.
Third but not least, to Robert Stockman:
Your post under the heading of "Disunity" exemplifies many of the virtues I
am convinced we need to allow Talisman to function as the powerful
constructive tool it has the potential to become. Most of what you wrote
needs no commentary or response beyond my heartfelt agreement with it, but
there was one thing to which I wanted to respond: your feeling that this
thread should disappear.
I started this thread in the hopes that it could be something other than what
it currently is (hmm... haven't I read Juan making such a comment about a
thread he started recently? :), and continue it only in the hope that it
might still be turned in that positive direction. So I quite agree that it
should disappear in its present form; and if it becomes clear that it cannot
be transformed, I will abandon it and move on to more constructive threads.
I thank you for lending your considerable powers to the possibility that
something good may yet come of all this.
With sincere regards to all three of you, as well as to all those whose
responses I have failed to acknowledge,
Kevin Haines
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 23:43:19 +1300 (NZDT)
To: TLCULHANE@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: Re: Therapy, Forgivness and Justice
ffolks,
I am thankful for the wonderful displays of colour from Nima, Terry and
Alison. These letters are like precious messages from God, conveying
insights from the unseen. Be thankful that your penetrating words shall be
perpetually engraved on my heart, and on tablets of crysolite...
Perhaps we should some day discuss the basis of reasonable discourse....and
other interesting matters...
With abundant affection,
Robert.
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 04:41:28 -0700 (MST)
From: Sadra
To: Geocitizen@aol.com
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: White Flags & Doves (Re: back to conscience)
Dear Kevin--
I'd like to drop this whole thread, if it's ok, as it has drained me, and
move on to something else. Robert Johnston is gone for now -- or maybe
not! -- so let's just leave it at that. I meant no personal disrespect to
you, Keven, but wholeheartedly disagree with your position -- that is all.
Let's just "agree to disagree" on this one. And, no, I do not want you to
follow my orders or anyone else's. Hey, I'm one of the counter-elitists
here, remember ;-) Everyone's opinion counts to me so along as it
doesn't seek to label mine or those of others on this list as heretical or
disloyal to the covenant, etc.. _Beware_ the next time to those who seek
to do so. The last thing this Faith needs right now are Khomeinists. I've
heard enough of this junk from other arch-conservative religionists
(i.e. fundamentalist Christains, Muslims and Jews) to last me a couple of
lifetimes. Please, let us let a hundred flowers bloom...Amen to that!
Regards,
Nima
---
O God, cause us to see things as they really are - Hadith
"In the mirror of their minds, the forms of transcendent realities are
reflected, and the lamp of their inner vision derives its light from the
Sun of Universal Knowledge" - Secret of Divine Civilization
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 95 09:41:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Newcastle Conference
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
With many thanks to Rob for posting a report of the 8th Irfan conference
at Newcastle, and I for one am very pleased to see this topic, namely,
anti-Baha'i polemic, is receiving some scholarly attention and analysis.
There were a couple items in Rob's report that in particular caught my
attention.
"Dr. Robert Stockman spoke on "The Limits of Discourse
in the Baha'i Community and their Consequences," focusing on the
needs of any community to define boundaries of internal discourse
in order to preserve its unity. He focused on two issues that
have been raised by non-Baha'i critics of the Faith about its
internal discourse: the treatment of Covenant-breakers and the
existence of prepublication review. Continued development of the
review process to make it more consultation-based will resolve
much of the criticism of it."
I like to hear a bit more about these non-Baha'i critics who have raised
these issues about our internal discourse and what sort of things do they
exactly say. What motivates them to focus on these two issues?
"Dr. Moojan Momen presented on
the basis of persecution of the Baha'i Faith in Islamic law by
describing different Islamic legal categories (such as believer,
unbeliever, people of the book, and heretic) and noting how those
categories had been used by Muslims and Baha'is in actual court
cases."
If Rob has kept some brief notes on this presentation, would love to hear
them.
"Dr. Nichola Towfiq then presented a paper on "E. G. Browne's
Misconceptions." The paper noted various misinformations Browne
presented about Mirza Yahya, such as the statement that the Bab
appointed him His vali (successor) when in fact no such
appointment was made, and described various Azali interpretations
of the Bab's allusions to a future Manifestation of God as
referring to the advent of the next Manifestation in 1501 or 2001
years."
Again, I very much like to hear a bit more detail if available. The
Baha'i response to Azali claims and the business about the year 1501 or
2001 are all well discussed by Baha'u'llah Himself, so I'm particularly
intrigued to see what additional ground is being covered by Dr. Towfiq.
Sounds like a fascinating paper.
" Sunday morning Stephen Lambden gave a brilliant paper on
"The Position of Mirza Yahya Subh-i-Azal: Some Aspects of Azali
Anti-Baha'i Polemic and Baha'i Apologetics." The paper noted the
critical need to examine the writings of the Bab and Baha'u'llah
in far greater detail, for they will reveal aspects of the
station of Azal usually not considered and will likely make it
clear he was never granted a formal position of successorship by
the Bab; that a life of Yahya and a much more thorough study of
his movement is necessary to correct some misinformation
properly; and that a more thorough examination of Baha'u'llah's
relationship to Yahya will reveal many important details."
Rob may be well aware of this (and if not, Dr. M. Derakhshani (whom I
believe is known to Rob ;-} can provide him with details), about a year
ago, a Persian believer in Australia wrote a massive book on Azal and
Azalis, drawing from a large body of Tablets, including extensive study
of the Kitab-i Badi` (Baha'u'llah's most important response to Azali
charges). I'm only mentioning this as Rob may wish to put Lambden in
touch with this Australian researcher so they can collaborate and
synergies.
Also, as I know there are a couple of Baha'i publishers on Talisman, they
may wish to contact this believer in Australia for possible publication
of this pretty comprehensive study. If interested, suggest contacting
Dr. Derakhshani at Wilmette.
Question for Rob: what are the plans for publishing these papers? And
also will the papers from the previous 7 Irfan conferences be published
as well?
Again, thanks to Rob for raising the level of discourse.
regards, ahang.
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 11:19:17 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: Re: back to conscience
Dear Everyone,
I think Kevin makes some very interesting points.
I have a question: should the members of Talisman be able to
be true to their conscience and say openly what they feel?
The rules of Talisman are such to allow open discussion without
question of the members' motive.
Another question: how are non-traditional ideas going to be
accepted in the wider community if they are not developed by
critical dialogue?
The reason for the anger is because we are not talking about
what kind beam to use to build a bridge - we talking about
essence of everyone's conscience.
regards,
sAmAn
=END=
From: l.droege@genie.geis.com
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 95 17:34:00 UTC 0000
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Christmas
Am sitting here watching a performance of Handel's "Messiah" on PBS--
not only an affirmation for Christians but for us Baha'is as well...
"Arise, shine, for thy light has come, and the Glory of the Lord has risen
upon thee."
Merry Christmas.
Leigh
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 13:14:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Cheshmak A Farhoumand
To: bahai-discuss@bcca.org
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu, bahai-women@bcca.org
Subject: Christmas Mass
Something really funny happened last night so i thought to share it with
you all. I went with a friend to a Methodist Christmas Service. It was so
so beautiful and moving. I have gone to Christmas mass in the past but
only to Catholic and ANglican. So, this was a bit different. We sang
Christmas Carols, listened to a wonderful Christmas message from the
Minister and then had a candle light ceremony while we sang silent night.
The most beautiful part of the service was when they played silent night
on bells. i had tears in my eyes, it was so moving.
ANyway, when my friend and i were leaving, the Minister was at the door
saying goodbye to everyone. When my turn came, i told him how much i
enjoyed the service and he said "i noticed you. you were sitting on the
far right by the wall, right?" i said yes. He said, "i could tell you
were paying real close attention and when we prayed you were
concentrating, so thank you for your attention." i told him again that it
was a beautiful service and i wish i could have told him i am a Baha'i,
but there was a line up of people waiting to say goodbye. I did notice
though that the comment made an impression on my friend who is Methodist.
Anyway, just wanted to share this with you to i guess make the point that
i think it is so important for Baha'is to get out and be involved with
other people and groups. We are different and people notice. When they
notice, they will ask and we can open a dialogue of mutual learning and
fellowship.
At one point in the service, there was the lighting of the candles on the
alter. As the second candle was lit, the following phrase was said, "the
second candle represents the return of our Lord, Jesus Christ, may God
open our eyes and heart so we can recognize him." i was so touched and
thought to myself, don't these people at least need to hear about
Baha'u'llah's claim so they can investigate it. I am now thinking of
going again to this church and speaking to the Minister. Perhaps he will
allow someone to make a presentation to his church on the Faith.
Nice talking to you all, sorry to have taken up your time.
Regards,
Cheshmak
=END=
From: Geocitizen@aol.com
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 13:34:34 -0500
To: nima@unm.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: White Flags & Doves
Dear Nima,
I will be most happy to peacefully abandon this thread, as you have
suggested. I especially appreciate your using the phrase "agree to
disagree," as it indicates we both respect one another's views and sincerity.
We simply find our difference of opinion on this one matter irreconcilable,
and agree that it would not be constructive to further discuss it. So let us
move on to matters on which we can find some agreement, or at least on which
our disagreements can yield more nutritious fruit. :)
Regards,
Kevin
=END=
From: Geocitizen@aol.com
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 13:34:43 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: secondary and tertiary (was re: energies...)
Hoping that I have been successful in my attempt to leap out of the frying
pan (with much-appreciated help from Nima :) here I go right into the fire,
which has most recently shown up in an exchange between Jim Harrison and
Philip Belove.
Jim contends that many of the issues usually occupying center stage in the
Talisman discourse are really secondary and tertiary issues, and that the
core problem from which the other problems spring has been mostly ignored.
Philip responded by saying that we cannot afford to ignore the problems that
Jim calls secondary and tertiary. By now, no one who has read more than two
of my postings should be surprised to find that I agree with both of them.
;)
But on the question of where our priorities ought to lie, Jim Harrison
carries the day. His categories of tertiary, secondary, and primary issues
may be clarified for some if I use a medical metaphor in which we consider
symptoms, the disease or disorder itself, and the root cause of the disease
or disorder.
Suppose I and a friend are eating in an expensive restaurant to celebrate
some joyous event, when suddenly my friend begins a display of embarrassing
symptoms. His face contorts; grotesque, strained sounds come from his mouth;
his arms and legs begin to flail about, rattling the silverware and fine
china on the table, and people at neighboring tables begin to stare. At this
point in my embarrasment I might urgently tell my friend to stop all that,
not understanding that he *can't* stop, because these are symptoms of a
deeper problem. Here we are at the tertiary level, where everything is
important and nothing can be ignored, but neither can anything much be
accomplished by trying to "solve" these symptoms without probing for the
deeper problem.
As the waiters and other diners gather around to criticize my friend's rude
disruption of their evening, somebody who once had a friend who took a first
aid course remembers something about situations like this. Noticing that my
friend's face is beginning to turn purple, the man shouts, "He's suffocating!
He needs air! Open a window!" Now we've reached the secondary level, where
the problem is correctly identified, but proposed solutions still may not
help anything until we probe still deeper.
Finally, just before my friend slumps into unconsciousness, an actual doctor
arrives for her dinner reservation, rushes over, and administers a swift
Heimlich maneuver, dislodging the small bone that had been stuck in his
esophagus. As we all praise the physician for her decisive and correct
diagnosis, my friend gradually regains his natural vigor, and our celebration
of the joyous festival can continue. This is the level of action to which
Jim has repeatedly called us, although he has not claimed the status of an
all-knowing physician (we are all but students of the One Physician :).
The symptoms the Baha'i community is exhibiting can be embarrassing: we
question each other's loyalty to the Cause whenever we feel our narrow
understanding of this Revelation is threatened; many local communities live
in abject fear of any real change or the influx of large numbers of
"outsiders" into our ranks. The disorder is severe enough that nearly a
whole generation of scholars feels stymied in any effort to develop advanced
forms of Baha'i scholarship.
These problems are important and cannot be ignored, but if we are to solve
them, we must find and correct the root cause or causes. It is in this
context that time spent focusing on the symptoms might be much better spent
focusing on the core issue. This is all Jim has said, and I find it utterly
mystifying that he has been met with either opposition or silence every time
he has proposed this.
I hope we can overcome this tendency, and turn the great potential of this
list toward solving the root problem.
Regards,
Kevin Haines
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 12:48:51 -0700 (MST)
From: Sadra
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Ma'ani
Dear Brent, Ahang and Talizens--
This latest episode feels really spooky, if you ask me. I
don't know the specifics of the case regarding Michelle, but for the
record a large part of the Ma'ani family are still committed Baha'is. Dr.
Daryush Ma'ani who lives in Graz, Austria, and is the brother of Jamshid
Ma'ani, is a Councillor (or was it an ABM -- I can't remember). He's also
the author of a highly important study of the Hidden Words, Ganj-i Asrar
(The Treasured Secrets), and the HW entry in the now defunct Baha'i
Encyclopedia was written by him. There is also a Ma'ani, another close
relative of Jamshid's, who is (or was) a member of the National Spiritual
Assembly of the Baha'is of New Zealand. And of course, there's a
Ms. Ma'ani who works for the Baha'i World Centre. So let's be careful
before passing sweeping indictments of the entire Ma'ani family.
Regards,
Nima
---
O God, cause us to see things as they really are - Hadith
"In the mirror of their minds, the forms of transcendent realities are
reflected, and the lamp of their inner vision derives its light from the
Sun of Universal Knowledge" - Secret of Divine Civilization
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 13:59:48 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Talisman
Subject: Policy of non-interference in government
Juan noted:
>>Thus, with regard to politics, it is very clear that Shoghi
>>Effendi's total ban on politics was not a forever-binding
>>interpretation of Baha'u'llah's principles, but a temporary and
>>ad hoc policy that in many ways runs contrary to Baha'u'llah's
>>own example of defying royal absolutism in the Ottoman Empire and
>>Qajar Iran by calling for parliamentary and democratic
>>governance. Shoghi Effendi as Head of the faith had every right
>>to institute the policy. The question is whether it is
>>permanently binding, and how to determine this. One final
>>arbiter in my view has to be the Writings and intent of
>>Baha'u'llah.
Rob Stockman wrote:
*I am told* that there is a letter of the Guardian stating the policy of
avoiding politics is a "temporary strategy"--I *think* those are the words--and
that the House of Justice can gradually lift the policy. This is what the House
has been doing in the External Affairs work; otherwise it is not clear how the
Baha'i institutions could be involved in such worthy but politically
controversial efforts as getting the U.S. Congress to ratify the genocide
convention.
This brings up the subject I referred to a few days ago, the power of
the House to infallibly apply the Teachings. This power is referred to
in these words by the Guardian:
"This Administrative Order is fundamentally different
from anything that any Prophet has previously
established, inasmuch as Baha'u'llah has Himself
revealed its principles, established its institutions,
appointed the person to interpret His Word and
conferred the necessary authority on the body designed
to supplement *and apply* His legislative ordinances.
Therein lies the secret of its strength, its
fundamental distinction, and the guarantee against
disintegration and schism."
(The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 145; also see pp.
19-20 where the Guardian says that the House of Justice
and the Guardian are empowered to infallibly apply
the principles of the Faith -- in addition to the laws)
I wrote to the House and asked if the fact that the NSA got involved in
encouraging passage of the Genocide Convention, meant that the principle
of non-involvement in politics was suspended for individuals. I have
sent copies of my letter and the reply from the House to several of you.
In part, the letter from the House, which is in the compilation on
"Peace" states:
"The general policy already enunciated by Shoghi
Effendi in 'The World Order of Baha'u'llah,' pages
63-67, should be scrupulously upheld by the friends.
However, as the Faith emerges from obscurity, the
application of certain aspects of this policy will
require the clarification of the House of Justice.
With the passage of time, practices in the political
realm will definitely undergo the profound changes
anticipated in the Baha'i writings. As a consequence,
what we understand now of the policy of non-involvement
in politics will also undergo a change; but as Shoghi
Effendi has written, this instruction, 'at the present
stage of the evolution of our Faith, should be
increasingly emphasized, irrespective of its
application to the East or to the West.'"
Brent
=END=
From: "Mark A. Foster"
Subject: Various Subjects
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 15:07:13 -0600 (CST)
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Talismanians -
I have just returned from Orlando, the SED conference, and Epcot
(the food was great, BTW, in the Moroccan restaurant).
FAYI (for all y'all's information - as folks used to say back during
my days in Mississippi), I will be incorporating several subjects into this
message.
First Subject:
John, The name of the fellow who did the computerization of the
Qur'an and decided (with some textual support, apparently) that it was
written in multiples of nineteen (the abjad value of vahid/unity) is Rashad
Khalifa. I knew him (a bit) through several phone interviews. I also
have all his English-language books.
Rashad was not too friendly to the Faith, and I never told him I
was a Baha'i. In fact, he had allegedly been "accused" of being a Baha'i
by some people and was very defensive about it.
His organization is called the United Submitters, and the
headquarters is Masjid Tucson (in Arizona). Members are quite active on
the major online services (CompuServe, Prodigy, America Online, etc.).
However, the Submitters' postings are regularly attacked by other Muslims
(especially on CompuServe) who argue that they have no business in an
Islamic message area.
Strangely, many of the Submitters seem to like the Baha'i section on
CompuServe. They will sometimes post questions about the Faith, (all
friendly). I suspect that it derives from a feeling of brotherhood (?)
with Baha'is, given that orthodox Muslims by and large do not like
either group. The Submitters have also promoted their version of the
Qur'an (which emphasizes nineteen) in the Baha'i section. As section
leader, I have always been polite to them. And they are certainly
treated better in the Baha'i, than in the Muslim, section.
As you say, Khalifa was murdered. He also pled no contest to a rape
charge several years before that! As would be expected, that is a highly
sensitive area for the Submitters.
About Farrakhan: One of the other Black Muslim groups (in the same
line from Fard Muhammad) is called the Nubian Islamic Hebrews. Their
theologies are very similar. However, my impression, based on the
possibly biased sample of my conversations with members of both groups,
is that the Nubians are more doctrinally oriented than the Nation of
Islam. The majority of Nubians I have met know qur'anic Arabic, while
most of the members of the Nation of Islam I have spoken with do not.
I have a book written by the Nubian founder which is entirely
devoted to the number nineteen in the Qur'an and which claims that
Rashad Khalifa stole the idea from him! I do not know whether his
correct. However, I would suggest that Farrakhan might have gotten his
views on qur'anic numerology from the Nubians. But I have no clue
whether the idea goes back to Fard Muhammad or to Elijah Muhammad.
Next Subject:
To all: The Baha'i Chair at the University of Maryland is having
severe financial problems. Unfortunately, they have not had the time to
publicize it. However, I had a conversation with some people (at the SED
conference) who do some of the coordination for that activity, and I
offered to post a message on Talisman, etc. making folks aware of the
problem. From what they told me, unless they get the needed support, the
Baha'i Chair might be disolved. If you are interested in helping out,
please address all correspondance to:
Baha'i Chair for World Peace
Center for International Development
and Conflict Management
Tydings Hall
University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742 U.S.A.
Next Subject:
And, again, to all: It seems obvious to me that the term "learned in
Baha" applies to anyone who is *learned in Baha* - and not just
those in the institution of the learned. Although I have not seen
*anyone* refer to themselves directly as learned, others seem to have
been reading all sorts of such things into people's postings.
Can't we just accept that there are certain people who, *in the*
*sight of God*, are learned, that these are not necessarily the same as
those with academic credentials, and that we can all leave it to God
and, perhaps to others to some extent, to make that determination?
Shouldn't we all selflessly engage in whatever jobs or services we feel
that can best perform and forget about all the divisive labeling,
name-calling, and speculating over who has a right to this or that
distinction?
Next Subject:
Re: democracy, it seems to me that the Baha'i institutions (and
perhaps the civil governments which will, as Juan said, exist along side
of it) are democratic in the sense that they are governments of the
people. That is to say, the methodology is democratic. Rulers are
popularly elected, and, now that we have no living Guardian, the
Counselors, the highest position to which any Baha'i can now be
appointed, are selected by the institution of the rulers (the House).
However, the Baha'i system can also be considered aristocratic (the
Guardianship), autocratic (in the sense that the rulers are, while
consulting their communities, not to base their decisions on special
interest groups or lobbies but on their own, hopefully, depersonalized
consultations), and theocratic (in that the institutions are established
under Baha'u'llah's Covenant and are, to varying degrees, inspired).
Warm Greetings,
Mark
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion (Structuralist) *
*President (1995), Kansas Sociological Society *
*Academic Director (and Kansas Dir.), Foundation for the Science of Reality *
*Founding President, Two-Year College Sociological Society *
*Address: Department of Sociology, Johnson County Community College *
* 12345 College Blvd., Overland Park, KS 66210-1299 U.S.A. *
*Phones: 913/469-8500, ext.3376 (Office) and 913/768-4244 (Home) *
*Fax: 913/469-4409 Science of Reality BBS: 913/768-1113 (8-N-1; 14.4 kbps) *
*Email: mfoster@tyrell.net or mfoster@jccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us (Internet); *
* 72642,3105 (Staff, Three CompuServe Religion Forums);UWMG94A (Prod.);*
* Realityman (America Online Ethics and Religion Forum Remote Staff); *
* RealityDude (MSN);Realityman19 (CNet);Realityman (Interchange) *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
___
* UniQWK #2141* The manifested Unity of God emanates in His creation's diversity
=END=
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 09:14:22 +1300 (NZDT)
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: genuine psychological understanding
Talismans,
The question that has arisen in in my mind is just how we should deal with
viciousness when we meet it in our fellow Baha'is. What if I am the target
of slanderous, hypocritical and deceitful attacks? What should I do?
Clearly an attitude of forgiveness is enjoined in the Writings. We are
asked to show love towards our enemies. How much more should we show love
to those who are supposed too be our friends. Heartfelt consultation
between the parties would seem to be a genuine act of love. But what if
the attacks persist and bring real damage? What should we do then?
Attack back in kind? I see no approval for this in the Writings. What
then? The obvious answer is to take the matter to the institutions of the
Faith. To the local assembly, or to national assembly, or to the House
itself. These are options legitimately open to all believers. Less
desirable -- but nonetheless possible -- would be the taking of civil
and/or criminal legal action. At the end of the day, though, the problem
is intensely personal and would seem to require some kind of spiritual
adjustment on the part of the aggrieved person. Sometimes people carry
their wounds to the grave, hoping/believing that on the other side they
will achieve peace of mind, and redress for their complaints. I wonder how
many Baha'is fear death; and I wonder how many do not fear death. It may
be an sure index of spiritual health. I do not think that the blameworthy
would welcome their impending meeting with God. It seems to me that true
courage only arises from the overcoming of the fear of death...
What are slander and deceit and hypocrisy? It seems to me that they may be
considered forms of unthruthfulness. Afterall truthfulness is the
foundation of all virtues. The slanderer, the deceitful person and the
hypocrite all contravene Covenantally enshrined values, and on a continuum
the Covenant Breaker -- though I have no wish to discuss this creature at
this moment -- is probably best seen as a liar, in my view.
Again, what does this mean for a discursive setting like Talisman? It
means that vicious persons are unable to engage meaningfully in rational
discourse -- discourse which requires a truth-seeking motive, and the
reaching of understanding and agreement on matters. Aristotle (whose ideas
on this find parallels in the Writings -- particularly those on the
relationship between science and religion) understood this very clearly.
He said that the human spirit, the purpose of which is the manifestation of
the evidences of rationality, has both an ethical and an intellectual
propensity. If these are out of kilter then rationality is impossible.
So an immoral person, according to this view, is unable to achieve
rationality, even where the intellectual function is strong. (In the Faith
our source of morality is the Writings...)
Logically, a person who fails to be rational, is -- by degrees --
irrational. An irrational person's viewpoint is not to be trusted, because
it reflects a very circumscribed reality -- the reality of the irrational
person's mental and mortal veils. Extreme irrationality shows as madness.
Curiously, 'Abdu'l-Baha states (in SOW) that friends who prove false will
be visited by madess...
Where does this madness originate? According to psychoanalytic thought
(etc), this kind of mental illness arises because of unresolved childhood
conflicts -- conflicts with parents and siblings. Essentially, the
mentally ill person remains in an infantile condition until these conflicts
are worked through. It is possible for these conflicts to be worked
through in the context of general life processes. So, even here on
Talisman, it is possible that participants will be resolving their
conflicts as a part of their discursive trip. This is not so hard to
accept, if we take the achievement of "wholeness" as the major end of all
education, and so on... Of course there will be some who find the normal
day-to-day wear and tear of life provides insufficient assistance in the
removal their veils. Such people require specialised expert assistance.
It is not accidental that House member Peter Khan said that The Calamity is
being experienced in the West as severe mental tests. It is my hope that
Baha'is will become better attuned to the causes and manifestations of
mental suffering, and learn to become more effective in dealing with it.
It seems to me that genuine psychological understanding is pretty rare in
our communities...
Robert.
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 14:34:49 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Sadra
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Ma'ani
On Mon, 25 Dec 1995, Jinab-i Haji Mirza Sadra Albuquerquiyyih wrote:
> record a large part of the Ma'ani family are still committed Baha'is. Dr.
> Daryush Ma'ani who lives in Graz, Austria, and is the brother of Jamshid
> Ma'ani, is a Councillor (or was it an ABM -- I can't remember). He's also
> the author of a highly important study of the Hidden Words, Ganj-i Asrar
> (The Treasured Secrets), and the HW entry in the now defunct Baha'i
> Encyclopedia was written by him. There is also a Ma'ani, another close
> relative of Jamshid's, who is (or was) a member of the National Spiritual
> Assembly of the Baha'is of New Zealand. And of course, there's a
> Ms. Ma'ani who works for the Baha'i World Centre. So let's be careful
> before passing sweeping indictments of the entire Ma'ani family.
Mrs. Ma'ani in Haifa is a refined and marvelous person. Anyone who merits
working so closely with the Head of the Faith for so many years -- that
speaks volumes to me. Her daughter is a cherished friend of mine, and a
member of the Board of Directors of the Baha'i Justice Society. When I
hear the name "Ma'ani" I think of them, and of Dr. Ma'ani in Austria, whom
I met when I was a student in Austria in 1982. I never criticized the
family or this distinguished family name.
Brent
=END=
From: cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca (Christopher Buck)
Subject: Doctors, Farmers, Scientists, Artists
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 95 16:52:50 EST
There are many mansions in Baha'u'llah's Paradise. There are
recompenses and lofty stations for all kinds of service in the Faith.
Doctors and farmers receive the highest praise in the Writings of
Baha'u'llah. Agriculture and medicine, among all other occupations, appear
to have an importance in the eyes of Baha'u'llah that exceeds all others.
Similarly, artists and scientists have a great right among the
people, according to the beloved Master.
For one drop of blood shed in the path of the Beloved, *myriads of
oceans* will be recompense. The station of one who takes up his/her pen in
defense of the Faith will excite the envy of the Concourse on High.
The Institution of the Learned seems to have had its roots in the
practice of having full time, deputized teachers of the Faith among
various Baha'i communities in Iran (see Taherzadeh's *The Covenant*).
Among all of these high stations, there may be different *ranks*.
A Baha'i teacher or a Baha'i scholar *might* belong to the individual
class of the Learned, which is distinct from the Institution of the Learned.
This is where I believe this entire misunderstanding arose. Juan
was talking about the origins of the concept of the Learned and what
Baha'u'llah might have originally meant by it.
Now of course the Learned has evolved into an Institution of the
Faith, and that is where the emphasis and primary identification of the
Learned resides.
But simply saying that there is also an individual class of the
Learned is a far cry from equating any outstanding Baha'i teacher or
scholar with a Hand of the Cause.
Unfortunately, a misunderstanding of this point touched a raw
nerve and various accusations of elitism were leveled at Juan. Let's
pretend for a moment that Juan is the other kind of *Doctor*--a physician.
Now Juan might be a good physician or a poor physician. Either
way, Juan belongs to the class of physicians whose profession happens to
be ranked alongside farmers as occupying the highest profession.
Simply classing *Dr. Cole* in the class of physicians does not
make him Dr. Albert Schweitzer or Dr. Ruhe or any of the many marytrs of
the Faith who were physicians. No claim of elitism is being made here.
No charges of elitism that I know of were voiced when the teaching
pamphlet, *Farmers Are First*, was published. But the moment someone
suggests that a Baha'i academic *might* be classed with the Learned (as
the Master's gloss on the Aqdas verse indicates), all hell breaks loose.
And let's suppose I am wrong on this. I would invite Robert
Stockman to consider that that which is doctrinally suspicious is not
necessarily *Covenantally-suspicious*.
For example, Counsellor Jacqueline Delahunt, NSA member Patricia
Locke, and Dr. David Ruhe believe there were Native Manifestations of God.
Dr. Ruhe's statement that Dekanawida was a Prophet is now on video and
Counsellor Delahunt's statement that White Buffalo Calf Woman was a
Manifestation of God has recently been published in a book.
In light of the recent letter from the Universal House of Justice
that Robert Johnston received, what are we to conclude? That Dr. Ruhe and
Counsellor Delahunt are somehow wrong?
Considering that the House's role is not to interpret per se, but to
refer to the authorized interpretations of the Master and the beloved
Guardian, I would simply observe that there is a plurality of understanding.
Even when a statement by the Guardian is adduced, we still have to
contextualize it, and ask some fundamental questions regarding the domains of
conferred infallibility.
In Boston, on August 13th, 1994, I personally heard Dr. Ruhe explain
why we must not be dogmatic about certain statements of the Guardian (such
as the statement, *We cannot possible add names...*) that *might not* fall
within the three spheres of the Guardian's conferred infallibility.
Therefore I second Ahang's request that Robert Stockman discuss his
conference paper online, so that we can benefit from his reflections on
the limits of discourse and the morality of knowledge.
-- 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: "Mark A. Foster"
Subject: Politics
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 16:08:51 -0600 (CST)
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Talismanians -
While there certainly are some temporary measures instituted for
various reasons (such as review), I am not sure that involvement in
politics, correctly understood, is one of them.
To my understanding, the prohibition is against engaging in partisan
politics - not politics in general. For example, becoming a judge is
sometimes involves a political appointment, and yet we see members of
the American NSA who are judges.
Therefore, I do not think that this prohibition against partisanship
will be abolished. Rather, the rules of the game will change. There
will, in the future, be no electioneering (at least as it presently
exists) and no political parties. These changes may, at the discretion
of the Universal House of Justice, allow greater political involvement
by the believers.
Warm regards to all,
Mark
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion (Structuralist) *
*President (1995), Kansas Sociological Society *
*Academic Director (and Kansas Dir.), Foundation for the Science of Reality *
*Founding President, Two-Year College Sociological Society *
*Address: Department of Sociology, Johnson County Community College *
* 12345 College Blvd., Overland Park, KS 66210-1299 U.S.A. *
*Phones: 913/469-8500, ext.3376 (Office) and 913/768-4244 (Home) *
*Fax: 913/469-4409 Science of Reality BBS: 913/768-1113 (8-N-1; 14.4 kbps) *
*Email: mfoster@tyrell.net or mfoster@jccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us (Internet); *
* 72642,3105 (Staff, Three CompuServe Religion Forums);UWMG94A (Prod.);*
* Realityman (America Online Ethics and Religion Forum Remote Staff); *
* RealityDude (MSN);Realityman19 (CNet);Realityman (Interchange) *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
___
* UniQWK #2141* The manifested Unity of God emanates in His creation's diversity
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 15:14:49 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Talisman
Subject: Hmmm
To make things more interesting, I have verified that Michelle Ma'ani is
*not* subscribed to Talisman! I think she just posted here.
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 16:27:09 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: the Ma'ani family
Dear All,
I too am related to Jamshid Ma'ani. One of his brothers, Manuchehr,
was a Knight of Baha'u'llah - he passed away before Jamshid made his
claims - Mrs. Ma'ani who serves in Haifa, was the wife of Manuchehr.
Most of Jamshid's brothers, there were 8 in all, I think, remained
faithful - some live in the U.S. I can ask my dad, through whom
I am related to Jamshid, about other particluars if anyone is
interested.
Meanwhile, Ahang's suggestion of following Brent's move seems
prudent to me - lets wait.
regards,
sAmAn
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 15:41:47 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: "Mark A. Foster"
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Politics
On Mon, 25 Dec 1995, Mark A. Foster wrote:
> To my understanding, the prohibition is against engaging in partisan
> politics - not politics in general. For example, becoming a judge is
> sometimes involves a political appointment, and yet we see members of
> the American NSA who are judges.
In American constitutional law, the executive and legislative branches of
the government are referred to as the "political" branches. The judicial
branch is supposed to be non-political. That's why more types of protest
are permitted under US law at the White House and at the Congress, than
are permitted at the Supreme Court: The Supreme Court is not supposed to
be swayed by public opinion; it's supposed to interpret the law.
The Federal Courts are not permitted to rule on what US law terms
"political questions." These are matters within the exclusive purview of
one of the two political branches of the government (e.g. whether or not
to extend diplomatic recognition to this or that foreign government).
Judge Dorothy Nelson was appointed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals,
and was confirmed by the U.S. Senate, based on recognition of her
abilities and her temperament. That's the basis on which *all* judges
are supposed to be appointed. The fact that many judicial appointments
are highly politically motivated, does not change the underlying
principles; nor is the judicial system so politicized that an impartial
judge cannot function inside of that system.
Also, I think it's important that she did not need to run for this office
in a general election. Neither did Jim Nelson, when he was a municipal
judge in Los Angeles; he was appointed by Governor Ronald Reagan, and had
to stand for a "retention" election. I don't think he actually campaigned
during these elections.
In New Mexico, I don't think a Baha'i could be a judge; that's because in
order to be appointed by the governor, you must declare membership in a
political party, and the first election thereafter is an open election in
which you must declare a party candidacy. Thereafter, you face occasional
retention elections, during which you need not have declared a party
affiliation. But I don't think a Baha'i could get that far.
One more point. I think that more than partisanship is prohibited to
Baha'is. Certain state department appointments, or UN appointments, even
if nonpartisan, involve "matters of state" which I think are at present,
off limits to us. We can hold administrative positions, carrying out
such policies; but cannot be involved in *making* them.
=END=
From: Don_R._Calkins@commonlink.com (Don R. Calkins)
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: radical/conservative/progressive/etc
Date: 25 Dec 1995 18:13:39 GMT
"He urges you to exert your utmost to get the ... Baha'is to put aside
such obnoxious terms as "radical", "conservative", "progressive", "enemies of
the Cause", "squelching the teachings", etc. If they paused for one moment
to think for what purpose the Bab and the Martyrs gave their lives, and
Baha'u'llah and the Master accepted so much sufering, they would never let
such definitions and accusations cross their lips when speaking of each
other. As long as the friends quarrel amongst themselves their efforts will
not be blessed for they are disobeying God"
((from a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, 24 February 1950, to an
individual, cited in the compilation 'Living the Life', in the Compilation of
Compilations, Vol II, p21, #1325))
- sent via an evaluation copy of BulkRate (unregistered).
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 20:58:04 +0000 (MULTINET_TIMEZONE)
From: maeissin@ichange.com (Michael Eissinger)
Subject: There is a power...
To: Noorbakhsh.Monzavi@hibo.no
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu, bahai-faith@bcca.org, nmo@postman.hibo.no
Forgive me if this is redundant, but...
the following quote was posted as a daily reading...
> "There is a power in this Cause, a mysterious power, far far far
> away from the ken of men and angels.
> That invisible power is the cause of all these outward activities.
>
> It moves the hearts.
> It rends the mountains.
> It administers the complicated affairs of the Cause.
> It inspires the friends.
> It dashes into a thosand pieces all the forces of opposition.
> It creates new spiritual world.
>
> This is the mystery of the Kingdom of God."
>
> -'Abdu'l-Baha'-
Although this saying has often been attributed to the Beloved Master, it
is one of those sayings that has entered the popular culture of the
Baha'i Faith, but is not scripture. It is often quoted at firesides and
deepenings and bantered about, however, I don't believe there is an
authenticated tablet containing this text anywhere.
I believe that, like the Marriage Tablet, this is not 'Abdu'l-Baha, but
rather the words of Ahmad Sohrab paraphrasing the Master. It was
included in Baha'i Scriptures, p. 304, and referenced back to "Mirza
Ahmad Sohrab, Diary Notes, July 7, 1914. I believe that Baha'i
Scriptures should have referred to Sohrab's diary, dated Port Said,
Egypt, 8 July 1913, which reads as follows...
"After dictating several wonderful Tablets Abdul Baha laid stress upon
the fact of the great _power_ exising in this Cause, a mysterious power,
far, far, beyond the ken of men and angels. That invisible power is the
source of all these outward activities. It moves hearts. It rends
mountains. It administers the complicated affairs of the Cause, it
inspires the friends. It dashes into a thousand pieces all the forces of
opposition. It creates new spiritual worlds. This is a mystery of the
Kingdom of Abha."
You can see that this is not a quote, but rather an explanation of what
the Master had said. Other direct quotes in the diary are clearly
indicated as such, both in the form of translations of Tablets and
letters, and in conversations.
You can find this on page 39 of "Abdu'l-Baha in Egypt", published by
Rider & Co, London. This is only part of Sohrab's diaries, and, as far
as I know, the only part that ever made it into print. My copy of the
book has no publication date, however, it does indicate that it was
approved for publication by the _Publishing Committee of the National
Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States and Canada_.
Michael Eissinger
Los Angeles
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 20:19:28 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: Re: Hmmm
On Mon, 25 Dec 1995, [G. Brent Poirier] wrote:
> To make things more interesting, I have verified that Michelle Ma'ani is
> *not* subscribed to Talisman! I think she just posted here.
>
Dear Brent,
Unless someone is forwarding articles to her, how is she able to
read Talisman?
And now for the $64,000 question: how did you verify her subscription?!
Ahhh... the mysteries of internet :-)
take care,
sAmAn
=END=
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 19:01:16 -0800
To: talisman
From: margreet@margreet.seanet.com (Marguerite K. Gipson)
Subject: Re: Hmmm
Boy, I can't wait for the holidays to be over, and John finds this mess...
He will never leave it again. And where is Burl?? I just finished his book.
So, do I smell a book in the making called *tali-antics*???
Margreet
At 08:19 PM 12/25/95 -0600, Saman Ahmadi wrote:
>On Mon, 25 Dec 1995, [G. Brent Poirier] wrote:
>
>> To make things more interesting, I have verified that Michelle Ma'ani is
>> *not* subscribed to Talisman! I think she just posted here.
>>
>
>Dear Brent,
>
>Unless someone is forwarding articles to her, how is she able to
>read Talisman?
>
>And now for the $64,000 question: how did you verify her subscription?!
>
>Ahhh... the mysteries of internet :-)
>
>take care,
>sAmAn
>
=END=
From: Kavikpakak@aol.com
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 21:58:46 -0500
To: cfarhoum@osf1.gmu.edu, bahai-discuss@bcca.org
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu, bahai-women@bcca.org
Subject: Re: Christmas Mass
What a wonderful story!! I think it must be a fairly common event for
Baha'is to attend a Christian service, be moved by the music (for me,
especially at Christmas), and to think, "If only these lovely people had any
idea that all this hopes and prayers have already been answered!" I have
never figured out a to point this out without seeming to come to the service
with an agenda. (This is probably much more a reflection of my timidity than
of reality.) I would really appreciate hearing if you are able to speak to
the minister, and what his/her reaction is. Pakak/Nycki
Saxton
=END=
From: Stephen Bedingfield
Subject: INTRUDER ALERT (Klaxons Wailing)
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 20:59:22 MST
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>INTRUDER ALERT>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
sAmAn (that guy with the two lumpy A's in his name) asked how one could
post to Talisman without being on the list.
Well, if you're reading this message friends it means you do NOT have to be
a list member in order to post to the list.
"Mr Worf, get security down to list engineering right away. Mr Data you
have the Walbridge."
BTW sAmAn, to get a listing of talisman's members send an email to:
Majordomo@majordomo.ucs.indiana.edu
with the following in the body of text: who talisman
Loving regards,
stephen
khs1@gov.nt.ca a.k.a. sbedin@gov.nt.ca
--
=END=
From: Don_R._Calkins@commonlink.com (Don R. Calkins)
To: mfoster@tyrell.net
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Politics
Date: 25 Dec 1995 21:25:48 GMT
> To my understanding, the prohibition is against engaging in partisan
politics
Mark -
I would add electioneering also, tho' I suppose that it could be argued that
this is included in 'partisan politics'.
There have been a number of Baha'is that have been elected to local offices
in small towns. You may know of Clay Schiffelbein, a Baha'i in Missouri who
was either Mayor or Town Counsel member until recently. (He and Gretchen
lived near Indianola IA in the mid 70's, which is where I am now.) As I
understand it, he allowed his name to be placed on the ballot but neither
campaigned nor allowed anyone else to run a campaign on his behalf. And I
have been told that there have been several instances in Alaska. The biggest
problem in many small towns is finding someone who will serve. During the
municipal elections this last November here in Iowa, there were 50 towns in
Iowa in which there were no candidates for mayor and 5 of them ended up with
the person elected by write-in refusing to accept the postion.
Don C
- sent via an evaluation copy of BulkRate (unregistered).
=END=
[end of 12/25/95 session]
Talisman emails received 12/26/95
---------------------------------------------------------
Date: 26 Dec 95 01:32:57 EST
From: Steven Scholl <73613.2712@compuserve.com>
To: Talisman
Subject: Welcome Michelle
Just a note of welcome to Michelle. It seems that Robert Johnson has left the
door open, which must account for the cool reception you have received from some
of your fellow guests in this forum.
Ahang, please remember that Talisman is not a Baha'i institution. I always get
nervous when Baha'is on board feel that this is a closed forum for the faithful.
Certain Talisman principle cannot compromised. If someone comes on board to join
our party, and if you do not want to listen to their comments, you are not
obligated to pick up their messages.
With warmest Baha'i love to all (and to all a good night)
Steve Scholl
=END=
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 01:09:30 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: Re: INTRUDER ALERT (Klaxons Wailing)
Dear Stephen (it's so cold in Cambridge Bay .....),
Thanks for the info.
What I was wondering is how someone could get posts from others
without being subscribed. I suppose a message from anyone who sends a
email to "talisman@indiana.edu" will be read by us - but a person
who is not a member should theoretically not be able to posts
from others sent to "talisman@indiana.edu".
going where no men have gone before,
sAmAn
=END=
From: Stephen Bedingfield
Subject: Re: INTRUDER ALERT (Klaxons Wailing)
To: s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.edu (Saman Ahmadi)
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 0:49:03 MST
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Greetings my friend, sAmAn:
> Dear Stephen (it's so cold in Cambridge Bay .....),
-40 C with a brisk west wind
> What I was wondering is how someone could get posts from others
> without being subscribed. I suppose a message from anyone who sends a
> email to "talisman@indiana.edu" will be read by us - but a person
> who is not a member should theoretically not be able to posts
> from others sent to "talisman@indiana.edu".
Of course you are correct. I was occupied with the thought of both posting
to and reading from the list. When a non-list member posts to a list, then
that non-list member will be sent copies of all Group replies. So it is
possible that one can start a thread and follow it without being a member.
But you are right when it comes to reading posts straight from the list.
Warmest Arctic smiles,
stephen
--
Stephen Bedingfield | "We desire but
Box 115, Cambridge Bay NT X0E 0C0 | the good of the world and
Canada (403) 983-2123 | the happiness of the nations"
email: sbedin@inukshuk.gov.nt.ca | - Baha'u'llah
=END=
From: Don_R._Calkins@commonlink.com (Don R. Calkins)
To: s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Re: Hmmm
Date: 26 Dec 1995 05:54:11 GMT
> And now for the $64,000 question: how did you verify her subscription?!
You don't suppose that he's a closet hacker! 8-)
Don C
He who believes himself spiritual proves he is not - The Cloud of Unknowing
=END=
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 95 08:09:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: "73613.2712@compuserve.com" <"73613.2712@compuserve.com"@esds01.mrgate.bmoa.
umc.dupont.com>,
talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Welcome Michelle
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Steve (Scholl),
I have no intention of discussing this particular individual
until John Walbridge has ascertain the details.
> Ahang, please remember that Talisman is not a Baha'i
> institution. I always get nervous when Baha'is on board feel
> that this is a closed forum for the faithful. Certain Talisman
> principle cannot compromised. If someone comes on board to join
> our party, and if you do not want to listen to their comments,
> you are not obligated to pick up their messages.
While it is true that Talisman is not a Baha'i institution per
se, it is ran by a Baha'i and the vast majority of its
participants are Baha'is who uphold the principles of the Faith
and discuss matters related to the Faith. And while it is also
true that Talisman has a number of rules, the principles of the
Faith and specifics directives of the Central Figures will not be
subordinated to any man-made rule(s).
If it turns out that there is indeed Covenant-breaker(s) on
Talisman, and John knowing that has nevertheless decided to keep
said person(s) on this forum, then I will leave immediately! I
will not now, or ever, be party to a forum that has such
individuals on it.
I want to emphasize that neither Brent nor myself are stating
that Michelle Ma'ani is a CB. All we are saying is to let
Walbridge determine the facts and make a decision as the list
owner. It is his decision, and not ours. After he has made his
determination, then we each can decide how to individually
respond to it -- and I've indicated above how my decision process
will unfold.
There are two important points to keep in mind:
1. For me, there cannot be a conflict between rules of a
particular club or organization (such as Talisman) and the laws
and principles of the Faith. For example, I will not join a golf
club which is exclusive to while men only. So, to me rules of
Talisman cannot be in direct conflict with the laws of
Baha'u'llah -- and presently they are not. The rules of the
Faith regarding association with CBs are well known and must be
upheld.
2. Let's suppose that there is a CB on Talisman. How are we to
maintain the integrity of the discussions or the openness of its
discourse? It not just the question of not wanting to read what
they have to say, but also not wanting them (declared enemies of
the Faith!) to read our open remarks. Steve Scholl doesn't post
very often on Talisman so this may not be an issue for him, but
for some one like myself who gets engaged in a wide range of
issues on Talisman, this will be a practical problem. For
example, at times Talismanians discuss certain shortcomings of
the past or present administration. They do so out of the purity
of motive to gain a deeper understanding of the situation and be
able to better the process. These thoughts are shared with a
group of believers who have the best interest of the Faith in
forefront of their thoughts -- there are also one or two
non-Baha'is on Talisman who are friends of the Faith (though at
times I wonder!, but clearly have no malicious intents towards
the Faith). But why would we want these comments to be read by a
declared CB, someone who has no interest of the Faith in heart
whatsoever and has every intention of harming it? What guarantee
is there that such individuals will not take comments made on
Talisman and echo them in publications against the Faith? Do we
want to *knowingly* put ammunition in their hands?
So, you see, the issue is a bit more complicated than just
saying, well, don't read their stuff. There is the legitimate
issue of the Faith's protection which must squarely be dialed
into our thinking.
Walbridge has so far done a nice job of protecting Talisman and
*us* from such situations and I like to see it continued.
ahang.
=END=
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 11:30:28 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: BTW..
Dear Ahang,
I forgot to mention that there is a little paragraph in
the "Encyclopedia of Religions"? (I am not sure of the
title of the book) about the "Orthodox Baha'is". There
are a couple of other groups: the two Remey groups and
Jamshid Ma'ani.
I think internet is one those parallel processes that
the Guardian spoke about - a while someone posted the quote
from "World Order of Baha'u'llah" about a "means of communication..".
take care,
sAmAn
=END=
From: "Bud Polk"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 12:38:17 +0600
Subject: Flames, wars, lists and Talismaniacs
Dear Taliswomen and Talismen,
I am saddened and aggravated by the time, words and bandwith wasted on
petty quarreling on this list. I am neither pro- nor anti-, gullible
or world-weary as regards any issue or person on this list. I find the
flames and wars on this list to be so very similar in tone and style
to those on several other lists to which I subscribe. Perhaps it is
the medium itself -- assertion, rebuttal, argument, counterargument
until no one even recalls what a thread is about. And add a liberal
dose of argument ad hominem. I belong, for example, to a list for
manic-depressives on which there are "literalist" pro-ECT
(Electroconvulsive therapy) and "progressive" anti-ECT factions. Both
accuse the others of heterodoxy. Flame wars erupt from time-to-time,
but sniping is as constant as it was in Sarajevo. Were I to substitute
"UHJ" for "ECT" the two lists might merge without anyone noticing.
Botanists argue over Gleason and Cronquist's recent attempt to update
and standardize Gray's Botany (Fernald, 1950) into one grand scheme.
The botanists, too, resort to rock throwing and name calling.
The only differences I see on Talisman as compared to other lists is
that the arguments are more convoluted and the flames are more witty
but not one wit less vitriolic. (Also, it seems that to be of any
significance, a post must exceed 2,500 words :-) Few women flame on
Talisman. A research question: do Talismen have higher testosterone
levels compared to the general population?
When I became a Baha'i 25 years ago, there was not a single
schorlarly work available to a Baha'i who wanted something more than
the euphemistic popularizations then available -- and still available.
It was during a discussion with an insistent and intolerant Christian
that I first learned that Baha'u'llah had three wives. Our history
were whispered to me in the darkened hallways of the House of Worship
as if they were a part of some Baha'i Kabbalah or Gnosticism. So how I
rejoiced -- then and now -- with the publication of each new work of
scholarship. Each new work has sent me back to the Writings on a
quest for more knowledge. So I came to Talisman to lurk and learn and
to contribute at times.
My life and those of my family depend on women and men who work in
nearby steel mills, factories, shops, and construction sites. They
are very ordinary people who measure the passing of the year by the
fishing and hunting seasons. But they have the good sense to
recognize a fire and put it out before it spreads. They are the
Volunteer Fire Department of Porter, Indiana, population 3,000.
Support your local fire department,
Bud Polk
=END=
From: Member1700@aol.com
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 13:55:53 -0500
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Back again
I just got back from a few days in Palm Springs with the kids and three of
their cousins. It was fun--balmy and in the 70s with everybody spending most
of the time in the swimming pool!
But, of course, I missed you all. So, here I am back, ready for more
stimulating discussion of issues. (No food fights, please.)
Love to all,
Tony
=END=
Date: 26 Dec 95 14:31:35 EST
From: Steven Scholl <73613.2712@compuserve.com>
To: Talisman
Subject: Re: Welcome Michelle
Dear Ahang and Friends,
Regarding Covenant-breakers on Talisman and the frosty welcome for Michelle:
1. It seemed to me that Michelle was being branded because of her name. I felt
that Brent and Ahang's responses were uncalled for and had the air of spiritual
posturing (e.g. I cannot associate with you but "May God aid you"). My concerns
were identical to Nima's. I object to such knee-jerk reactions. A more
appropriate response, it seems to me, would have been to ascertain the facts
before jumping to conclusions. And this could have been done discreetly rather
than posting first on Talisman. Michelle has informed us that she is not a
Covenant-breaker though she is related to Jamshid Ma'ani. That, for now, is good
enough for me.
2. I had not, and have not, really thought out the implications of having a
Covenant-breaker join Talisman. To be honest, I do not know what to think about
it. But I do know that I am uncomfortable with the notion that we cannot have an
open forum. This is not a Baha'i-only forum and it is theoretically open to
anyone on the Internet. This is not a Baha'i Feast or convention. One need not
show their Baha'i card to enter Talismanland. I object to the possibility of
giving Covenant-breakers so much power over our group. What I hear Ahang saying
is that if it is impossible to fence out people that he and Baha'i institutions
object to as "heretics", then we must shut the whole thing down. That seems to
be giving an awful lot of control over our discourse to a tiny and usually wacko
fringe element. I can hear the Montana Covenant-breakers coming out of their
underground silos after their next prediction of the end of the world fails to
materialize, saying, "Well, gee, we are still here, so let's go join all the
Baha'i Internet groups just to shut them all down. I mean we might as well do
SOMETHING until next Ridvan."
3. As for non-Baha'is using our frank talk about internal workings of the Bahai
Faith against us, well, Ahang, welcome to the real world. As I have said before,
we have nothing to lose by sharing our strengths and weaknesses with outsiders.
It is what all other faiths of substance do. The Mormons are not withering on
the vine over their problems with Mormon scholars and feminists. The Buddhists
seem to be able to discuss openly for all to see their struggle in creating a
Western Buddhism that is referred to as "engaged Buddhism." Jews are going
through a beautiful period of Jewish Renewal that takes a hard, critical look at
their problems and attempts to find a new path rooted in tradtition. Ahang asks:
"What guarantee is there that such individuals will not take comments made on
Talisman and echo them in publications against the Faith?" There are no such
guarantees, Ahang. But if we want to offer Baha'i as a model, we cannot hide
things that you or others find unpleasant or think non-Baha'is will find
unpleasant. That simply is the path of dishonesty and is not an effective means
for promoting the Baha'i faith. If someone comes into Talisman and hears that
Baha'is are wrestling with free speech issues, for example, or that there is
disagreement on women's service on the House of Justice, then we will simply
have to deal with it by writing honest apologetics.
What makes things more complicated is the traditional Baha'i attempt to pull the
wool over eyes, to try and cover-up internal debates out of fear that this will
be interpreted by non-Baha'is as disunity. But I think we have raked this issue
over the coals before, so let me stop here.
Best wishes,
Steve Scholl
=END=
From: "K. Paul Johnson"
Subject: Re: Michelle Maani's case
To: Ahang Rabbani
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 95 15:20:24 EST
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
According to Ahang Rabbani:
>
> [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
>
>
> Brent is someone whose words I take very seriously on such
> matters. I suggest we wait for John Walbridge's return before
> any further communication with Michelle Ma'ani -- John can then
> sort the matter out with Wilmette's help. If it turns out that
> indeed the specifics of the case are otherwise and she is a true
> seeker as claimed, then we will all extend her a warm welcome and
> take the discussion from there. But for the next few days, until
> John can ascertain the specifics of the case, Brent's advise
> seems very prudent to me. Certain principles cannot be
> compromised -- protection of the Faith is one of them.
>
> ahang.
>
What about "innocent until proven guilty"? Your position,
Ahang, is that someone who *might* have *some* connection to
covenant-breakers (aren't you supposed to be officially
informed of every person who has been *declared* one?) should
be *treated* like one as a matter of principle. Until you
learn for sure otherwise? What a lovely taste of justice in
the Baha'i worldview!
This really sucks.
=END=
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 12:52:32 -0800
From: derekmc@ix.netcom.com (DEREK COCKSHUT )
Subject: Re , Michelle Ma'ani.
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Dear Talismanians .
Steve and Paul seem to think everybody jumped all over Michelle . I
would point out I offered very politely to send her free of charge
material on the Right of God.
It is of interest she has not taken up my offer yet which still stands.
I will try and get the time to post information on the Gentleman
mentioned that Brent thought she might be involved with . Although
Michelle correctly pointed out many members of that Family serve the
Faith with devotion and honor. Indeed I number several as personal
friends .
I think it is a non-issue until John returns .
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
=END=
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 95 10:49:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Zuhuru'l-Haqq and translation
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Arman jan,
I appreciate your thoughts and questions and like to explore the
topic a bit more using your comments as the platform.
> I wanted to first thank you for the wonderful postings on Zuhuru'l-Haqq. I
> have been sharing it with my father and brother and it has brought back lots
> some memories for them. My father, being form Kashan, has very few memories
> of Fadil so this was very refreshing for him. The books seems truly amazing.
> I know why you hold this great scholar so dearly. I will be waiting for
> some more postings.
I am glad to hear that you enjoyed the comments on Fadil and Zuhuru'l-
Haqq. But I've decided to stop posting on this subject simply because
I don't see any interest in the thread. Talisman is rather peculiar
in this regard. For example, a passing comment, say, "lay Baha'is",
can generate tens if not hundreds of postings, but not a single one
(outside of Buck's and Walbridge's) on Fadil and Zuhuru'l-Haqq. Or
certain individuals have been going on and on for over a year now
about the problems of "Dialogue" magazine, but now are totally silent
on this affair. Not a day has passed on Talisman that certain people
have not complained bitterly about a few minor passages edited out of
Salmani's memoir, but now you don't hear them saying a single word
about suppression of nearly 8000 pages of history of the Faith! Very
peculiar!
So, due to lack of interest, I've decided not to discuss Fadil and
Zuhuru'l-Haqq on Talisman, and to continue my efforts of seeking
restoration of justice through private channels.
> The part of the Martyrdom of the Blessed Bab was unbelievable. Has there
> been another similar accounts that would make one think that Fadil was
> correct in his book saying that Anis was still alive for a short time after
> There martyrdom ?
The source for Fadil's comments (p 30 of ZH-3) about Mirza
Muhammad-Ali Zunuzi, surnamed Anis, still being alive for a few
minutes after the Bab's martyrdom is Haj Muin's narrative. Haj Muin
al-Saltinih-i Tabrizi was an early believer closely in touch with many
of the early figures of the Cause and has left behind a massive (700
page plus) history which in many ways is the most detailed account of
the Babi Dispensation -- on numerous occasions the beloved Guardian
refers to this account. In many ways, this narrative seems to be the
foundation of Fadil's work, though very clearly he added information
from many other primary sources which we have previously discussed.
Haj Muin makes this comment about the scene of the Bab's martyrdom
after having closely interviewed those present on that occasion and
quotes each of them. So, we should take his account as primary
source.
As to your question if there are other accounts which mention the
same, there is a rather short account by Jinab-i Ali-Akbar-i Uskui on
the history of the Faith in Adharbayijan which actually relies quite a
bit on Haj Muin's narrative and says basically about the same sort of
things, except its shorter. All of these early narrators were close
companions of one another and as such are influenced by each others
writings.
So, it seems to me that Haj Muin is the primary source for the account
of Bab's martyrdom as Fadil describes the event.
If you receive Payam-i Baha'i journal, not long ago, Dr. Nusratu'llah
Muhammad-Husayni published an article (I believe in 3 parts) on the
martyrdom of the Bab which he provided a number of fresh insights.
On the question of Anis, his love and his life, Ruhu'llah Mihrabkhani
has written a detailed essay, which soon I will post my inadequate
translation of it. I think you'll enjoy it.
> Also I didn't understand the point that was being made on The Dawnbreakers.
> I know that Baha'u'llah and the Guardian both thought highly of this book,
> but the point I think you were making, please correct me if I am wrong, is
> that we shouldn't hold The Dawnbreakers to be the standard for Baha'i
> history. because if we do we hold back Baha'i scholarship on the History of
> the Faith has it has been done before. I am right ?
Arman jan, on the contrary, my position is that we *should* hold the
Dawn-breakers as the standard of Baha'i history in its outline. It is
in certain of its details which there are alternative versions. And
the fact that I hold the Dawn-breakers as the standard of *Baha'i*
history is precisely why I disagree with such books as Amanat's or
Browne's.
There is no question that certain pages of Nabil's narrative were read
in the presence of Baha'u'llah. I seem to recall that the first two
chapters were read to Him by Mirza Aqa Jan. Also, Baha'u'llah
contributes in a few instance (which Nabil states specifically). But
clearly Baha'u'llah did not edit Nabil's text. What He approved seems
to be the general theme of Nabil, which aims at establishing
connection between the Two Dispensations, and his overall outline of
events. So, this can't be interpreted as approval of each and every
piece of data in there.
The beloved Guardian by translating Nabil, was also extremely faithful
to its content, even where he thought Nabil was wrong or that there
were alternative more plausible accounts. These he captured in many
of the footnotes.
So, the fact both Baha'u'llah and the Guardian were "involved" with
the Nabil's narrative, is no guarantee of its accuracy. There are
clearly other historical texts which contradicts Nabil. There are
even Scripture which contradicts Nabil.
Let me give a short example. Nabil gives the date of the Bab's return
to Shiraz as March 1845. In fact he gives a number of dates
associated with the Bab's pilgrimage journey covering the period that
He left Shiraz in Sept '44 to His return back. Just about all of
these dates are wrong. There is a Tablet of the Bab, which He Himself
gives the correct dates, all varying from Nabil by a few months. The
Tablet is quoted by Ishraq-Khavari in Muhadirat, vol. 2, p 729-31.
Clearly this Tablet was not available to the beloved Guardian or he
would have used it as a footnote to provide correction to Nabil.
There are a number of such small historical errors in Nabil which the
future editions must correct by addition of more footnotes. The
beloved Guardian was fully aware of this fact and would be pleased, I
firmly believe, if careful historians were to add these footnotes. I
hope that in due time, the Supreme Body would appoint a team of
students of the Faith to undertake this task.
> Just a quick question regarding the Tablet of Visitation of Baha'u'llah. I
> know that the Guardian didn't like translations from Arabic into Farsi, but
> do you know if there was/is any , explanation or summary of the Tablet of
> Visitation of Baha'u'llah in Farsi ?
Off hand, I don't recall any commentaries on the Tablet of Visitation
of the Bab and Baha'u'llah in Persian. The only thing that I'm aware
of is Ishraq-Khavari's research in identifying the source of the 4
Tablets which Nabil extracts paragraphs to assemble the Tablet of
Visitation for the Twin Manifestations. And as I recall, actually
Ishraq-Khavari incorrect identifies the Tablet where the last
paragraph of the Tablet of Visitation is extracted from it. He
thought that the last paragraph of the Tablet of Visitation came from
Baha'u'llah's Tablet of Visitation of Khadijih Bigum (the wife of the
Bab), but its not so.
Incidentally, regarding your comment about translation from Arabic to
Persian, I'm not at all convinced that there is a command from the
Central Figures against such translations. I believe that certain
statements from Them in this regard needs to be contextualized and
that no such prohibition actually exists in the Faith. Now, I realize
that a couple of years ago, the Persian section of the American Baha'i
printed a memo from the Research Dept stating that because of the
prohibitions by the Central Figures about translation from Arabic to
Persian, the believers should not translate the Kitab-i Aqdas from
Arabic to Persian, but I personally believe that this memo is taking
statements out of context.
The fact is, the vast majority (99% ?) of Iranians can't read Arabic.
Why should they! Their language is Persian, not Arabic. To demand
that the entire Persian-speaking Baha'i population must learn Arabic
in order to benefit from the Writings in Arabic, is in effect to cut
them off from at least half of the Revelation. This is like insisting
that all American believers must learn Spanish in order to benefit
from the Writings as none are permitted to be translated into English!
Does it make sense?
There is no question that because of historical circumstances, a large
chunk of Writings happen to be in Arabic. But I fail to understand
the World Centre's insistence as to why we need to deprive just about
an entire national community (Iranians) from these Writings. Where is
the logic in insisting that they must learn Arabic in order to have
access to Writings when in fact we pride ourselves about making our
Writings available to all the peoples of the world in their *own*
language!?
Arman jan, hope all is well with you. Please keep us posted (at least
through the Texas list) on the Youth Conference in Dallas. And kindly
convey my deepest love to your illustrious father.
affectionately, ahang.
=END=
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 15:15:26 -0700 (MST)
From: Sadra
To: Ahang Rabbani
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: A vote of confidence for Ahang
Ahang jan--
I speak for myself, but don't think for a moment that we're not all
sitting at the edge of our seats with the Fazil Mazandarani/Zuhur al-Haqq
thread. I know I am. Perish the thought if you're thinking otherwise.
Please, please continue your insights on the issue. The discussion has
been most illuminating and we've all benefitted tremendously thus far. The
lack of responses, which you justifiably lament, probably has to do with the
fact that you, Ahang jan, are the only real expert technician on the
subject in the entire Baha'i community at the moment ;-) Therefore I cast
my vote of confidence.
Regards,
Nima
---
O God, cause us to see things as they really are - Hadith
"In the mirror of their minds, the forms of transcendent realities are
reflected, and the lamp of their inner vision derives its light from the
Sun of Universal Knowledge" - Secret of Divine Civilization
=END=
From: Ray Masrour
To: "'TALISMAN'"
Subject: Recent discussions on 'learned in Baha'
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 95 17:09:00 PST
Dearest Friends: Allah'u'Abha,
I hardly ever get the opportunity to contribute to the discussions on
Talisman, mainly because of my inability to stay in par with the standards
of scholarship practised here as well as lack of time which deprives me of
even reading a good portion of the messages which I so much want to do.
Nevertheless, I do find time to read few posts each day and usually enjoy
the exchanges tremendously and am grateful for the opportunity to learn. I
have been quite intrigued and somewhat saddened, over the last few days, by
the nature and atmosphere of discussion of this subject. I can understand
the strong objections made by Robert, for his sensibilities have been
injured and some elements of what constitutes his attachment, his devotion
and love for the Faith have been disregarded. Or at least that is how I see
it, and obviously I may be wrong. At the same time it is obvious and goes
without any argument that Dr. Cole is a member of a distinguished group of
lovers of the Abha Beauty who have done much for scholarship in this
glorious Faith of ours and who certainly deserve our utmost love and
respect. This is also true of others on this list who through their
contributions have not only instructed many a lurker like myself in the
facts and figures ,but have in fact expanded the horizon of our spiritual
understanding of this magnificent and incomparable vision entrusted to us by
the Blessed Beauty.
On this particular subject, however, as I read the messages back and forth,
I find truth in all the posts. There is substance and logic in each message.
There are profound statements and strong arguments on each side. There is,
however, in my view something missing. It is an elusive thing, a thing hard
to catch and even harder to practise. It is what transforms a general
conventional exchange into a Baha'i exchange. In other words something that
makes of something quite ordinary, something that is quite beautiful, from
something without feeling while entirely true, something that fills the
heart with joy even if one disagrees with its contents completely. This
something, in my view, is humility. This wonderful quality which Baha'u'llah
tells us is the primary manifestation of the Spirit of Faith, once
established in the heart of each believer, contains among others two
princely attributes , reverence, and simple courtesy.
It is my belief that if this recent exchange had incorporated the fragrance
of humility in the expressions, no matter how exalted one's position; had
included heartfelt reverence and love towards those for whom so many have
given all and also towards the inestimable treasure of their infallible
guidance; and lastly if courtesy in the form of : judge yourself first,
second and always before judging others,had been used as a primary guidline,
none of what has transpired would have ensued.
Friends: I don't write this to either preach or limit the application of
these principles to only this discussion. It is my utter conviction that
these principles are among the many lamps which are to illumine for us the
highway of life and make possible for the first time in the history of man
the possibility of our reaching that spiritual destination that Baha'u'llah
has in so many of His writings has envisioned for us. How will we do it
without them? This is not just an emotional outburst on my part. Humility,
reverence, courtesy and other wonderful qualities emphasized so often in our
writings are spiritual principles that impact our lives not just because
they create such good feelings among people but also because they are
problem solvers. Better yet, they prevent problems from arising. I see them
as shots immunizing us against the most terrible of diseases, disunity,
hatred, suspicion, jealousy and many others. Friends: all of us have seen
humility in action. It does wonders. I think it is the ultimate weapon,
because, when sincere, it melts the hearts, it is love in action, it calms
us, we can never forget the one who has it. It is the sign of true devotion
and it is nothing new. We all have seen it. I think we would do well to
practise it in every aspect of our lives. And Talisman is such an important
part our lives.
You are all such lovely people,
Riaz
=END=
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 18:22:34 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Indeed assess/seeping energies
Dear Friends ,
Hey what is the ". . angle of ones outstreched arms during the long
obligatory prayer"? :)
I must say this brought a much needed smile to my face .
For a few months I have been trying to get inside Jim's metaphor /symbol
of the "Vision" of Shoghi Effendi and the "Spiritual descendents of the
dawmbreakers ." What is the guy trying to say ? I do not know if this is
what Jim is trying to say but this is what "I" see him saying .
In my rummaging arounf the sybol of "desendents" it occurred to me Jim
is serious about the Guardian 's appelation of descendency to the American
Bahais . On the one hand Shoghi Effendi is employing a rhetorical device in
the 20's and 30 's to organize a community with a distinct identity and endow
it with a vision of itself and its role as a religious community . That
effort in and of itself is most impressive to me . It is why I have
suggested in the past that the future will consider Shoghi Effendi a
political genius . While I think there is a particular social context in
which this rhetorical vision of our "true brother " exists , I do not think
it exhausts the "meaning " and implications of it .
There is and was a spitirual reality to what Shoghi Effendi as
Guardian, saw or "witnessed " about the revelation of Baha u lah and the role
of the American ( NorthAmerican) believers in its unfolding . This was after
all the land upon which Abdul Baha lavished praise - the Liberty issue - and
the Guardians remarks are frequently made in this context . Behind the
rhetoric there is the profound spiritual reality which constitutes the Babi's
as *Dawnbreakers * . A dawnbreaker has a relationship to that which is the
*Dawning Place. * The dawning Place is the source of our being and its sacred
homeland . The Babis it sems understood the Bab's reference to himself as the
symbol of the *Remembrance* of God . If we consider that Abdul Baha has
pointed out that the "hearts " of the believers are the Mashriqu 'l Adhkar -
the dawning Place of this Remembrence and it is too embody itself in the
world as an institution, we might say that the Babi's as Dawmbreakers were
fully cognizant of this spiritual reality , its esoteric core or *heart* .
This *recognition* of that Truth is what motivated them and was the source
of their courage . What is it that would compel people to make the sacrifices
they did? They recognized that the "inner " reality of the remembrence was to
be found within their own hearts and that this required its *observance* in
the world . I reralize this is not a Nasut level of historical explanation
yet I believe that regardless of their outer material and social
circumstances they - the Babis - understood the inner significance of the
dawning Place and their role as dawnbreakers .
It was this spiritual reality the Guardian tried so mightilly to get
across to the North American Bahais who lacked a context in which to make
sense of it . That is they were not very familiar with Persian culture or
Shiite tradition . This is the powerful symbolic value of his translating
Nabils Narrartive and editing it for English readers . At the same time he
tied this to a sense of the spiritual destiny of America . You see in
America their has long been a sense - going back to the Colonial period -of
this country and continent as a *Redeemer* nation. The Guardians genius is
two fold in this respect it seems to me . First the act of translation of
Dawnbreakers and second linkage of this "symbol " with the American notion of
redeemer nation . If Abdul Baha could praise the political and religious
liberty of North America , Shoghi Effendi could link it too an esoteric
tradition of Ibn Arabi , Suhawardi , Shayck Ahmad etc. and create a
commmunity that would provide the spiritual foundations which alone could
sustain the glorious experiment in *Liberty so praised by his grandfather.
This is the basis of my metaphor of the *Irfan Republic*.
My sense is the American Bahai community missed the point . So
focused on the Guardians building of the administrative institutions they
confused that with community and began to perceive Administration as an end
itself and now we run around muttering things like "absolute obediance " and
so forth. It did not take long for the American community to further confuse
the Bahai Commonwealth or World Order of Baha u llah with the Administrative
Order and even further reduce the Adminstrative Order to administrative
institutions e.g. NSA's, LSA's .
Essentially the Guardians attempt to awaken and form a distinct
religious community built on *Liberty* and intimate;y tied to the *Irfan of
the East as its absolutely essential pre-condition. It fell and continues
to fall on deaf ears . It is and was much easier to focus outwardly on - the
Exoteric - form and ignore the transformation and sacrifice required to
realize such a vision of reality given to us by Baha u llah . Instead we
plugged Shoghi Effendi into prevailing notions of what a religious community
looks like , Shiite versions for those of us from the earthly homeland and
Christian protestant versions for those of us from from the earthly home of
liberty . All this despite the fact the Guardian repeatedly told us of the
importance of the Mashriq u l Adhkar , that administration was not an end in
itself and that without the *Irfan * of the east , the *Orient* of hearts all
of this would crumble .
I find it fascinating that in the quote from _Citadel of Faith _ which
Jim mentions the Guardian links the " defenders of religious orthodoxy "
from without with "nefarious elements" from within the community as
challenges that undermine the community . I would like to suggest that the
"nefarious elements" the Guardian is refering to here - if we carefully read
this passage - are the " traditional defenders of religious orthodoxy "
within the community. Traditional religious orthodoxy - those who oppressed
and tyrannized the Bab and Babis , Baha u llah and Abdul Baha were
religiously orthodox . That is they were people who focused on the
preservation of the EXOTERIC or outer forms of a Faith as the reason for a
faith community . They demanded absolute obediance and constantly talked
about obediance , they were the ones who divided believers into the saved ,
the suspect and the damned. They were and are , I would suggest , the ones
who do not want to face the radical nature of the *Irfan * of the Babis ; the
Dawnbreakers of whom we are in the Guardians vision to be the spiritual
descendents of . I believe that Shoghi Effendi understood this perfectly
well .
The "would be warriors "of Baha u lah as the Guardian also comments
in _Citadel of Faith _ must understand what the Babis understood that any
lasting change ; that Life , Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness are
grounded in the *Remembrence of God , not in the correct zip code, check
balances, committtees , or Prozac . It is about an Irfan Republic not the
Prozac republic . It is the dawnbreakers who could provide a powerful model
of what people can accomplsh and what processes they can set in motion when
they are wedded to the *Remembrance * . It is not as though Badi did what he
did because Baha u llah promised him a new car when he returned from
delivering the mail .
My final thought for the moment is this . Those who would be
preoccupied with administration may well become its shadow . If this Cause
is not fundamentally about administration either as an end in itself or as
the "heart " of a religious community then to focus our concerns on the evils
of administration in the sense that its reform will somehow remedy our
situation and finally give us a community worthy of the name unwittingly join
forces with those "nefarious elements" within the community that is the"
traditional defenders of religious orthodoxy." In both cases administration
is confused with the purpose of the Faith . As a result we continue to search
for an exoteric solution to what is FIRST an esoteric problem . We must
first understand and become "dawmbreakers" and then build the "Dawning Place
of the Remembrence of God" that is within our hearts that it might manifest
itself in the world . That is the Mashriqu l Adhkar . And that is being
faithful to the primordial Covenant from which all covenants flow . That the
Desire of the "Hidden Treasure " to be known, that is manifest in the world
- both inner and outer - may be realized . Or as Abdul Baha has said "please
God ye may achieve it .
In their Social and Economic development letter 12 years ago the
Universal House of Justice pointed out that the " dynamic coherence" in the
world of the "Oneness of mankind " is "unmistakenly demonstrated " by the"
Mashriqu l Adhkar" the "spiritual center" of every Bahai community. That
center is both the human heart and an institution . And until we take
seriously Baha u llahs "command " to "Build ye houses of worship throughout
the lands" . The antidote to a moribound community and to the bastions of
rligious orthodoxy who would undermine the community is to found not in
reform of adminisration but rather in the building of "houses of worship ".
It is in regard to the Mashriq u l Adhakr that Abdul Baha said " be ye
engaged in nothing but this ." Perhaps we need to begin the hard struggle
of recognizing and observing the House of Worship within and begin to build
them and the world. Then we can expect that the administrative institutions
may gradually become filled with people who will allocate resources and
"protect and safeguard the liberty of a people who have assumed the role and
the responsibility of being spiritual descendents of the dawn breakers .
Then there is something to truly " celebrate therein" . the upcoming
marriage of the *Irfan * of the *orient * - Ibn Arabi and the legacy of
Jeffersonian democracy and" liberty."
Lets hear it for the World *Order* of Baha ullah , an Irfan Republic .
Such at least in my attempt to translate Jim's comments into terms that
I can get my mind and heart wrapped around .
warm regards ,
Terry
=END=
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 18:32:45 -0600 (CST)
From: Paul Easton
To: Sadra
Cc: Ahang Rabbani , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: A vote of confidence for Ahang
I second that vote. Ahang, please take into consideration all of us who
have profound interest in the subject, but lack the back ground to join
in the discussion. It is easier to vent personal gripes on "lay-Baha'is"
etc... than it is to provide an intelligent post on issues such as this.
Please know that - while I have only skimmed, and quickly deleted the
majority of the posts from the last few days - I have read and reread
your posts on this topic carefully. If all posts of this nature were no
longer posted here, where would they be? For myself, Talisman is my only
source of this kind of information. I feel your posts have been
well-thought out and the information has been of great value. With out
posts like this - for me - Talisman would be a useless forum for
intellectual mud-wrestling. Please continue your posts on Fazil Mazandarani.
Sincerly,
Paul Easton - peaston@worf.uwsp.edu
_____________________________________________________________________________
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: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 18:39:15 -0600 (CST)
From: Paul Easton
To: Talisman
Subject: No engagement in the "west"?
In an earlier post Tony mentioned that one reason the UHJ hasn't made the
95 day engagement law obligatory, is that we do not have engagement in
the west. ( a poor paraphrase, Tony please correct me if I did your
argument an injustice ) I see two flaws with this reasoning:
1) The law is only obligatory for PERSIANS, regardless of what continent
they live on. So Baha'is in Nepal - where engagement customs are perhaps
stricter than in Iran - are still not freed by this law.
2) We do have engagement in North America. The United States - as an
example - is a pluralistic society. Not only is there a wide range of
ethnic groups practising different marriage customs, there is also a wide
range of "family" cultures. There still are many families that take
engagement very seriously. It is precisely because the US is such a
mozaic (tossed salad, layered cake, etc...) that the government doesn't
legislate much in this area.
Believe it or not there are still arranged marriages in the United
States, there are young girls being married - against the law - at very
young ages, often against their will.
On the other hand are those Americans -perhaps the majority - who follow
the date --> sex --> live with --> engage/trial period --> marry with a
50% chance of latter divorce.
The Baha'i model: choosing one who is pleasing to you --> getting
to know each other (chaste dating, spending time with one anothers
families, lots of communication, and perhaps meeting with a
match-maker/marriage counselor) -->Parental consent --> payment of the
dowry --> the 95 days or less engagement period --> Baha'i Wedding --> A
lifetime of serving God and society together (divorce highly discouraged
and only allowed after a year of patience).
I feel that everyone would benefit by following the Baha'i model,
whatever their back-ground Baha'i or not.
There IS one thing that I am confused about, and that is the Baha'i
dowry. How would that be done? In cash equivalent? A gift or
investment of equal value?
Lastly, I would be interested in learning from those of you who have gone
before me. For a while on Baha'i-Discuss people were sharing their
marriage stories, which I found to be interesting and useful. I would
greatly appreciate any stories or advice any of you would like to share.
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: 26 Dec 95 19:33:39 EST
From: Habib Riazati <76101.3361@compuserve.com>
To: Cale
Cc: "\"Medrano, Phyllis\"" ,
Shahin Badiee , GLOBAL ,
Talisman
Subject: The Seal of the Prophets- meaning
Dearest Cale,Allah'u'abha
I hope everything is going well with you and your dear family.
As to your question about the seal of the prophet- I have alrady
responded to another Moslem friend and would like to forward the
same response to you. If you feel you would need more assistance,
please let me know and I would be more than happy to do whatever
I can to assist you.
With my warmest regards; Habib Riazati
--------------------------------
FROM: Habib Riazati, 76101,3361
DATE: 5/2/95 4:22 AM
Re: Copy of: Seal of the prophets
Dearest friend ; Salam
.....
Now, concerning your question about the Seal of the Prophets which Is
used to refer to His holiness Muhammad upon Him be peace and the fact
that He is the Seal of Messengers as well in connection with the claim
of His holiness Baha'u'llah as a new manifestation.
Many of my dear friends in this group have already provided you with
many insight on this matter , and so I just confined myself to
explanation as you have kindly asked me to do so. To demonstrate the
meaning of the phrase Seal in the Baha'u'llah 's writings I shall answer
it in three sections:
I. The acceptance of the fact that His holiness Muhammad is the Seal
of both Messengers and prophets.
First of all yes I agree with you that there are many-many traditions
in Islam in which reefers to His holiness Muhammad as the seal of
messengers and prophets.
His holiness Baha'u'llah , Himself reefers to Muhammad, as the one who
is the Seal of both Messengers and prophets. To begin our dialog ,
Let me to share with you two of His passages that reflects this fact
and demands some reflection.
( *****Since Majority of the passages that I am referring to are in the
Original Persian/ Arabic , as a result I am giving you the ESSENCE of
what is there, but give you the EXACT source in which you can locate
them. I will be more than happy to send you the ORIGINALS to any address
that you give me. *)
A. Baha'u'llah in a Tablet refers to Muhammad as the one who through
Him BOTH the Messengership and Prophethood ENDED.
Baha'u'llah uses the Arabic word " KHATAMA" meaning " ENDED" .
(* ISHRAQAT Page 293 line 3 *)
B. Baha'u'llah refers to Muhammad as " The Primal Point",
" The Dawning Place of all names", " The Prefect Word "....
(* La-a' li-u'l- Hekmat vol 3 page 83 section number 46 *)
Please Meditate on the second one until I get to it later.
2. The reality of Progressive revelation or the continuity of the
manifestations of God.
That means that due to man's continuos demand for growth, and the
fact that the requirements of living changes from age to age, then
we need to accept the continuity of religion as well.
As my dear friend Mr. Hakim's posting shows the Holy Quran also
testifies to this fact.
The Holy Quran has over 6000 verses, from which over 3500 are about
the fact of continuity of revelation. Some of these passages are
EXPLICIT or DIRECT and many others are IMPLICIT or IN-DIRECT.
Let me to share a few passages to you :
In Surih BANII -' ISRAAA-'IIL (* Surih # 17 ) verse 77 The PROGRESSIVE
REVELATION has been firmly established by saying:
" It is our METHOD to send to Mankind of messengers and thou will not
find change in our method."
After establishing the fact of " Progressive Revelation" in this verse,
He states the following universal passage as well to assist us to
understand it in the TIME-SPACE domain also.
In Surih Yuunus (# 10) verse 49 He says " And for every Ummat
(* Meaning Nation or Group *) there is AN APPOINTED TIME, when THEIR
TIME COMETH, then they CAN NOT PUT IT OFF an Hour..."
His Holiness Muhammad , in order , for His followers not to get the
CANCER which afflicted the followers of revelations before Him (* The
CANCER being : To believe that the one religion is the LAST religion *)
revealed some EXPLICIT
passages concerning His own religion and His own followers. The famous
one which Baha'u'llah also points it out is the verse 143 of
the second Surih BAQARAH in which He ( * Muhammad *) refers to MOSLEMS
to being NOT the FIRST group nor the LAST group in the history of
religions. The EXACT passage is " We have APPOINTED YOU a MIDDLE nation
". Baha'u'llah , in two of His famous tablets, one being
JAVAHER-UL- ASRAR which can be found in the 3rd volume of Tablets of
Baha'u'llah named Qalam-i- A'la page 1 as well as Lawhi- Sabr
or Tablet of Patience.
He even FIXED DATE for His own Revelation being 1000 years.
The most famous passages concerning these appears in the following
verses of the Holy Quran. In Surih Saba (# 34) verse 29 He says
" And they say: When is this promise if ye are truthful?"
and in the next verse 30 He says " Say yours is the promise of
A DAY which ye CANNOT POSTPONE nor HASTEN by AN HOUR.
And concerning the LENGTH of a DAY , He says in Surih HAJJ (#22)
verse 47:
" A DAY with God is as a THOUSAND YEARS of WHAT YOU RECKON."
So as you can see from these few passages, His holiness Muhammad, was an
upholder of Progressive Revelation.
Considering the passages in the second part , there SHOULD BE a MEANING
to the tittle of " Seal of the Prophets " or even according to even
Baha'u'llah " Seal of the Messengers" which is used for His holiness
Muhammad. Certainly It can not mean LAST in TIME-PLACE domain (relam)
Please note I say TIME-PLACE domain. What is the Meaning of the Seal,
then ?
We need to understand this, because this title " Seal of the prophets "
has according to Baha'u'llah in His second major work, Kitab-i-Iqan
has veiled the eyes of Moslems to such a degree that they rejected the
new revelations. Here is some of the exact words of Baha'u'llah :
"people of the Qur'an ... have allowed the words `Seal of the
Prophets' to veil their eyes", "to obscure their understanding, and
deprive them of the grace of all His manifold bounties".
He affirms that "this theme hath ... been a sore test unto all
mankind" ,and laments the fate of "those who, clinging unto these
words, have disbelieved in Him Who is their true Revealer".
The Bab refers to this same theme when He warns:
"Let not names shut you out as by a veil from Him Who is
their Lord, even the name Prophet, for such a name is but a
creation of His utterance." (Aqdas: Notes, pages 243-244)
Baha'u'llah again , in the Kitab-i- Aqdas says :
" Take heed lest the word "Prophet" withhold you from this Most Great
Announcement, or any reference to "Vicegerency" debar you from the
sovereignty of Him Who is the Vicegerent of God, which overshadoweth
all the worlds" . (The Kitab-i-Aqdas, page 80)
WHAT DOES THE SEAL OF THE PROPHETS AND MESSENGERS MEAN ?
According to the Baha'i Writings of which I shall give you some example,
The TERM Seal of the Prophets or END of the prophets, is intended to
convey the following two things:
1) In relation to the Time and Place :
============================
According To His holiness Baha'u'llah This statement of Muhammad was
one way to declare to them the greatness of the manifestation which is
going to follow Him. A Manifestation who is NOT a Nabi (* Prophet - or
even a messenger *) He is rather higher than these names. He is the
Promise of All ages, and this is as Baha'u'llah calls it the Most
Great Announcement. Please Note, this does not mean that Baha'u'llah is
BETTER than Muhammad, rather it wants to show that the INTENSITY of
this revelation DUE to the NEEDS of the AGE in which it has appeared is
greater. The Matchless feature of this AGE has caused Muhammad to refer
to it as the " Day of God " in the holy Quran, A day in which the
terms such as Prophets and Messengers are simply a creation belonging
to the Kingdom of NAMES.
In this regard Baha'u'llah has said :
"In truth I say: On this day the blessed words 'But He is the Apostle
of God, and the Seal of the Prophets' have found their consummation
in the verse "The day when mankind shall stand before the Lord of the
worlds." (Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, page 114)
Even in the holy traditions we can see some passages from Muhammad that
manifests the greatness of whatever relates to the future revelations:
For example we see that Abdu'l-'Aziz, son of Abdu'-Salam, hath related unto us
that the Prophet - may the
blessings of God and His salutations be upon him - hath said:
"Akka is a city in Syria to which God hath shown His special mercy."
and Again we read that Ibn-i-Mas'ud - may God be pleased with him -
hath stated: "The Prophet - may the blessings of God and His
salutations be upon Him - hath said: `Of all shores the best is the
shore of Askelon, and Akka is, verily, better than Askelon,
and the merit of Akka above that of Askelon and all other shores is as
the merit of Muhammad above that of all other Prophets. I bring you
tidings of a city betwixt two mountains in Syria, in the middle of a
meadow, which is called Akka. Verily, he that entereth therein,
longing for it and eager to visit it, God will forgive his sins, both
of the past and of the future. And he that departeth from it, other
than as a pilgrim, God will not bless his departure ..."
Anas, son of Malik - may God be pleased with him - hath said:
"Blessed the man that hath visited Akka, and blessed he that hath
visited the visitor of Akka ".
These can be found in Sahih-Bagari's book of traditions a
very respected book for the Moslems. His holiness Baha'u'llah
brings it in His last work called "Epistle to the Son of the Wolf"
on the pages 178 through 181.
2) Reality of the term " LAST " in the realm of CONTINUOS REALITY:
==================================================
As you know the reality of all the prophets are the same. They all are from
one God, and they all speak of the same reality. There is only ONE God,
so it's REALITY also needs to be one. We can not know God in His
NATURE.
Why ? Because knowing His nature requires to either be resemble to Him
or to be above Him, both of which is not possible.
So the ONLY WAY to know GOD is through His MANIFESTATIONS that
are the prophets , Messengers or whatever name we may call them.
(* Needless to point out the fact that THEY ARE ABOVE THE REALM of
NAMES *). They as His holiness the Bab in Persian Bayan and Baha'u'llah
in IQAN states are like the MIRRORS which are in front of the SUN.
They all reflect the rays of the SAME SUN according to the requirement
of the AGE in which they appear. Since their REALITY is ONE, should we
according to Bab in His book called " Seven Proofs" call them
" FIRST " is true because it is only ONE, the same is true if we call
them " LAST". As you notice, First and Last is ONE, since it DOES NOT
relate to TIME and PLACE rather it relates to the REALITY of the
MANIFESTATIONS of God..
That being the case, If we call them all with ONE Name, is acceptable,
since they are all ONE. Each ONE is the Spiritual RETURN of the
Pervious ONES. If we know the LATEST ONE , we have believed in ALL ,
and if we DENY ANY of them , we have DENIED them ALL.
To show you some examples , I invite you to consider the following
passages in the Bible:
In John chapter 5 we read: " For had ye believed Moses, ye would have
believed me" Please NOTE that in this passage JESUS identifies
His REALITY with MOSES.
Now Please consider the following passage from the Bible:
" Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last:"
(The Revelation of St. John, Chapter 1)
How can Jesus be FIRST and The LAST in the TIME-SPACE domain?
Beside if this is the TRUE , HOW can WE believe in MUHAMMAD, THE BAB
or BAHA'U'LLAH ? Our Christian friends, by looking at this statement
has concluded the same thing about Christ that Our Moslem friends have
done with the understanding of " Seal of the prophets or Messengers ".
So as we can all easily testify , THESE all refers to the REALITY of
these holy souls that are called manifestations of God.
This is the Same thing that JESUS called it WORD in John chapter 1
verse 1 saying:
" In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God." This is exactly why we can call all of them FIRST,
LAST, SEAL, PRIMAL POINT ,PERFECT WORD since they all refer to the
REALITY that they manifest.
His holiness Baha'u'llah explains this MATCHLESS feature in the
following words of His:
"And were they all to proclaim: "I am the Seal of the Prophets,"
they verily utter but the truth, beyond the faintest shadow of doubt. For
they are all but one person, one soul,
one spirit, one being, one revelation. They are all the manifestation
of the "Beginning" and the "End," the "First" and the "Last," the "Seen"
and "Hidden" - all of which pertain to Him Who is the innermost Spirit
of Spirits and eternal Essence of Essences. And were they to say:
"We are the servants of God," this also is a manifest and indisputable
fact. For they have been made manifest in the uttermost state of
servitude, a servitude the like of which no man can possibly attain.
(The Kitab-i-Iqan, page 179)
And Concerning the variation in the INTENSITY of their Message He
states :
"These attributes of God are not, and have never been, vouchsafed
specially unto certain Prophets, and withheld from others. Nay, all
the Prophets of God, His well-favored, His holy and chosen Messengers
are, without exception, the bearers of His names, and the embodiments
of His attributes. They only differ in the intensity of their
revelation, and the comparative potency of their light.
Even as He hath revealed: "Some of the Apostles We have caused to
excel the others."
(Gleanings from the writings of Baha'u'llah, page 48)
So , we should not CONSIDER ONE BETTER than OTHER if we are a true
believer. There is NO difference among any of them in REALITY but the
INTENSITY of their REVELATION varies.
Baha'u'llah in answer to a questioner who have asked the SAME EXACT
QUESTION that YOU ASKED , states the following in " Gleanings from the
writings of Baha'u'llah'
" In thine esteemed letter thou hadst inquired which of the Prophets of
God should be regarded as superior to others. Know thou assuredly that
the essence of all the Prophets of God is one and the same. Their
unity is absolute. God, the Creator, saith:
There is no distinction whatsoever among the Bearers of My Message.
They all have but one purpose; their secret is the same secret.
To prefer one in honor to another, to exalt certain ones above the
rest, is in no wise to be permitted. Every true Prophet hath regarded
His Message as fundamentally the same as the Revelation of every other
Prophet gone before Him. If any man, therefore, should fail to
comprehend this truth, and should consequently indulge in vain
and unseemly language, no one whose sight is keen and whose
understanding is enlightened would ever allow such idle talk to cause
him to waver in his belief.
The measure of the revelation of the Prophets of God in this world,
however, must differ. Each and every one of them hath been the Bearer
of a distinct Message, and hath been commissioned to reveal Himself
through specific acts. It is for this reason that they appear to vary
in their greatness. Their Revelation may be likened unto the light
of the moon that sheddeth its radiance upon the earth. Though every
time it appeareth, it revealeth a fresh measure of its brightness, yet
its inherent splendor can never diminish, nor can its light suffer
extinction. It is clear and evident, therefore, that any apparent
variation in the intensity of their light is not inherent in the light
itself, but should rather be attributed to the varying receptivity of
an ever-changing world. Every Prophet Whom the Almighty and Peerless
Creator hath purposed to send to the peoples of the earth hath been
entrusted with a Message, and charged to act in a manner that would
best meet the requirements of the age in which He appeared.
God's purpose in sending His Prophets unto men is twofold.
The first is to liberate the children of men from the darkness of
ignorance, and guide them to the light of true understanding.
The second is to ensure the peace and tranquillity of mankind, and
provide all the means by which they can be established.
The Prophets of God should be regarded as physicians whose task is to
foster the well-being of the world and its peoples, that, through the
spirit of oneness, they may heal the sickness of a divided humanity.
To none is given the right to question their words or disparage their
conduct, for they arethe only ones who can claim to have understood the
patient and to have correctly diagnosed its ailments.No man, however
acute his perception, can ever hope to reach the heights which the
wisdom and understanding of the Divine Physician have attained.
Little wonder, then, if the treatment prescribed by the physician in
this day should not be found to be identical with that which he
prescribed before. How could it be otherwise when the ills affecting
the sufferer necessitate at every stage of his sickness a special
emedy? In like manner, every time the Prophets of God have illumined
the world with the resplendent radiance of the Day Star of Divine
knowledge, they have invariably summoned its peoples to embrace the
light of God through such means as best befitted the exigencies of
the age in which they appeared. They were thus able to scatter the
darkness of ignorance, and to shed upon the world the glory of their
own knowledge. It is towards the inmost essence of these Prophets,
therefore, that the eye of every man of discernment must be directed,
inasmuch as their one and only purpose hath always been to guide the
erring, and give peace to the afflicted.... These are not days of
prosperity and triumph. The whole of mankind is in the grip of
manifold ills. Strive, therefore, to save its life through the
wholesome medicine which the almighty hand of the unerring Physician
hath prepared".
Well, My dear friend, I hope I have been of assistance to you on your
questions about " Seal".
With warmest regards, Habib Riazati
========================== Your MAIL ============================
Subject: Please Help Me
Author: Treefrog9@aol.com at INTERNET
Date: 12/16/95 2:02 PM
Hello, dear friends. I'm sorry, but I didn't know where else to write. I'm
deperate. I need the Universal House's Email address. I'm having a
discussion with a new Baha'i from Islam. We need to know if there are any
books which explain the teachings of the Qur'an in a Baha'i perspective, and
how to explain to a Muslim that Muhammad was the Seal, and not the very
"last" prophet to mankind (I realize that in one way He was: He was the last
true propheciser...) WITH QUR'AN PROOF! As we well know, Baha'u'llah's
proofs don't seems to go over too well with people of other religions: they
don't care if it's not from thier book. Any help appreciated, and I need
that address please! Thanks much. God Bless.
-Cale-
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 14:07:50 +1200
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: The learned in Baha...
Talismans,
Since I suggested a distinction between Baha'i scholars and the learned in
Baha I have been abused from pole to pole, and horizontally as well. I
have become the symbol of all that is evil in Baha'i communities (as well
as a general no-account bum), and anti-intellectual, an elitist, a mule...
Ohh, it goes on an on... Ad hominem? Bah! It was hunting season, and I
was the only duck on the pond. The shotguns blasted away. I wasn't even
flying. A few pellets stung me, but I managed to take flight and swing
out of the neighbourhood... At this moment I am back over the pond, flying
very high...
A question. Are we able to distinguish Cartesian doubt and endless
problematisation from certitude and freedom of perplexity? The former I
associate with that branch of Talisman discourse from which the shooters
came: the latter I associate with the Learned in Baha (The Institution:
Hands/CBMs/ABMs) as described in the Aqdas and notes.
I AM NOT SUGGESTING (AND NEVER HAVE SUGGESTED) THAT ANYONE IS A COVENANT
BREAKER. And I am not suggesting that it is impossible for a Baha'i scholar
to be one of the learned in Baha I am just trying to fit the right words to
the right realities...
Let me add this. I hope my question is not answered. Let's just assume
that it is rhetorical and provocative... shall we..
...swinging wide and fast...and high...
Robert.
=END=
From: l.droege@genie.geis.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 01:46:00 UTC 0000
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Flames and Innocence
>few women flame on Talisman...
Right, but I don't think it's the hormones. We women have merely learned
to internalize (but, man, what we're thinking... ).
Paul, re "innocent until proven guilty:" You're darned right. But don't
judge our Faith by its individual practicioners; we all are supposed to
be (or become) better than this!
BTW, I sent Michelle a private response to her questions on the UHJ, since
things have been so unpleasant here. Hopefully she got what she needed.
And, in the event she _is_ associated with covenant-breakers, imagine the
ammunition we just gave them: "these so-called Baha'is sure don't practice
what they preach, etc., etc., etc."
Ahang, please don't stop posting info on the Zuhuru'l-Haqq! I'm listening!
Leigh
=END=
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 18:09:21 -0800
To: "K. Paul Johnson" ,
Ahang Rabbani
From: margreet@margreet.seanet.com (Marguerite K. Gipson)
Subject: Re: Michelle Maani's case
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Hello all, I have to agree with Ahang and Brent for the cautious nature of
this... Paul, I don't know how long you have been a Bahai, or understand
the nature of all this. We can't afford to place the Faith in anykind of
jeopardy, or submit it to human error therefore the concern and the
cautious nature. --as I am thinking it could manage on its own, since
Baha'u'llah and God have it all in their hands... and whatever the case may
be with all this, just patience. I would rather be cautious and in error,
than carefree and in deep dodo for all eternity....
Just a thought,
Margreet
At 03:20 PM 12/26/95 EST, K. Paul Johnson wrote:
>According to Ahang Rabbani:
>>
>> [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
>>
>>
>> Brent is someone whose words I take very seriously on such
>> matters. I suggest we wait for John Walbridge's return before
>> any further communication with Michelle Ma'ani -- John can then
>> sort the matter out with Wilmette's help. If it turns out that
>> indeed the specifics of the case are otherwise and she is a true
>> seeker as claimed, then we will all extend her a warm welcome and
>> take the discussion from there. But for the next few days, until
>> John can ascertain the specifics of the case, Brent's advise
>> seems very prudent to me. Certain principles cannot be
>> compromised -- protection of the Faith is one of them.
>>
>> ahang.
>>
>What about "innocent until proven guilty"? Your position,
>Ahang, is that someone who *might* have *some* connection to
>covenant-breakers (aren't you supposed to be officially
>informed of every person who has been *declared* one?) should
>be *treated* like one as a matter of principle. Until you
>learn for sure otherwise? What a lovely taste of justice in
>the Baha'i worldview!
>
>This really sucks.
>
=END=
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 20:52:23 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: "I want my Zuhurul Haqq!"
Dear Ahang and All,
I once had a math professor who said that his greatest wish
was that after a lecture, the students would hold up lit
lighters and wave them in the air asking for more (like they
do in rock concerts).
I too have my lighter lit - that's one kind of flame that we
could use more of on Talisman.
take care,
sAmAn
P.S. Sheila Banani recommends the movie "Nixon".
=END=
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 95 07:13:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
Message-Id: <25041262215991/5921697@BMOA>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: In memory of Fadil -- part 1
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Fadil-i Mazandarani is undoubtedly among the most devoted Baha'is
of the twentieth century who on numerous occasions has received
incomparable expressions of love and appreciation from
Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi. His historic services stretched
well over half a century and spanning three continents in places
as far as Iran, India, North America and Europe, and in fields as
diverse as teaching, deepening, scholarship, collection of Text
and protection of the Faith, remains a shining examples for those
who aspire to serve this noble Cause.
Therefore, one is deeply saddened to note that after his passing,
"The Baha'i World", volume 13, does not carry a "In Memoriam"
article honoring this remarkable figure of the Faith.
As such, it is with utmost humility that I respectfully request
of the Universal House of Justice to address itself, should they
consider the matter worthy of their precious time, to publish a
belated "In Memoriam" article honoring the noble life and deeds
of Jinab-i Fadil, and to redress the grave injustices which
befell this outstanding figure of our Faith in latter phase of
his life. I can think of very few other believers of this
century who have rendered comparable serviced to the Cause of the
Ancient Beauty as Fadil-i Mazandarani has. Many Tablets of
Abdu'l-Baha and the beloved Guardian amply testify to this fact.
Though some forty years has lapsed since his passing, it is my
profound hope, and the hope of many others who seek knowledge,
that the Supreme Body will take steps to restore a ruined
reputation and to once again honor a peerless scholar and teacher
of the Faith.
Further, as a sign of our fidelity to the memory of the beloved
Guardian, I ask the Universal House of Justice that the
Guardian's specific instruction for the Jinab-i Fadil to be
numbered among those ranked as a Hand of the Cause of God, be
graciously instituted.
Additionally, if I may be so bold, permit me to request that
steps be taken to truly honor the memory of Fadil through
publication of his greatest contribution to the scholarship of
Faith, the nine volume series of Zuhuru'l-Haqq. I believe that
publication of the seven remaining volumes of this masterpiece
will provide fresh impetus for serious study of our history and
offer a superb model of scholarly achievement for all the
students of the Cause, both present and future generations, to
emulate.
As a token of my love for Jinab-i Fadil, I offer the following
brief biography of him in hope that future historians will write
extensively of his brilliant achievements and manifold
contributions in a manner befitting their historical proportions.
IN MEMORIAM
OF
THE HAND OF THE CAUSE OF GOD
FADIL-I MAZANDARANI
Mirza Assadu'llah Fadil-i Mazandarani was among the greatest
teachers, scholars and learned in Baha of his generation. In
truth, very few have attained the depth of scholarship and
understanding of history, philosophy, theology and Scripture
which he commanded with such ease and facility.
Fadil is a son of Aqa Mirza Mahmud (son of Aqa Rasul-i Isfahani),
who resided in Babul, in the province of Mazandaran. His family
was engaged in commerce and due to Mirza Mahmud s knowledge of
the Russian language, dealt extensively with the business
establishment of that country. His father possessed excellent
penship, eloquent composition and much piety. In religious
matters, he inclinations towards Skaykhi teachings, spending many
hours in meditation and frequently visited men of comparable
learning and qualities. Fadil's mother was a daughter of Mirza
Aqa Buzurg, a poet by nom de plume "Qasab".
Fadil was born in 1878 and from early age started his religious
and secular education under tutelage of the best teachers in his
native town. From such young age he showed remarkable abilities,
constantly engaged in reading and studying. At the age of
twenty, he entered the school of Hajji Kasim-i Big, enrolling in
the classes of Shaykh Isma'il Ibn Al-Haddad who himself had been
a student of Hajji Sharitmadar. [Note: Hajji Sharitmadar was
the teacher and protector of Quddus and is the person to whom the
latter entrusted His writings. Hajji Sharitmadar is the person
who collected the remains of Quddus and buried them in their
present location, he later married the sister of Quddus, surnamed
Maryam (Mary) by Quddus, as means of protecting her after His
martyrdom. He has left a detailed narrative of the life and
teachings of Quddus.]
It was in the course of his studies under this new teacher that
Fadil mastered such branches of learning as Arabic language,
Shi'ite jurisprudence, Islamic philosophy, science of Hadith,
logic, astronomy and Greek mythology. Soon after the passing of
his teacher, many of the fellow students, because of his great
learning and recognized abilities, adopted Fadil as their new
teacher. However, this act was not without its opposition from
the region's divines who objected to Fadil as a teacher due to
his mystic inclinations and Shaykhi thoughts. However, Fadil,
ignoring all such criticism, continued with his studies and
teaching work.
It was around this time that he began to associate with a number
of his father's friends who happen to be Baha'is and through them
he came in contact with a number of believers who had
participated in the Fort Tabarsi episode. These friendships and
the stories they related of the heroes of the early days of the
Dispensation ignited the spark of love of the Faith in his heart.
In 1903, with his father's consent, he moved to Tihran where he
continued with his studies and expanded his association with the
believers. It was then that he read the first piece of Baha'i
Writing in his life, the Tablet of Bisharat (Glad Tidings), which
caused him to immediately recognize the supreme character of this
Dispensation and the vision of the Faith for unification of the
world under the banner of Baha'u'llah.
His new found faith flaming in his heart, he embarked on a
in-depth study of the Writings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha --
a study which occupied the center stage for the rest of his life.
Soon he left for a year-long visit to his native land,
Mazandaran, where he told of the new Message to his parents and
began once again associating with believers in that region. It
was during this period that he commenced collecting notes and
information related to him by eye-witness participants in the
Fort Tabarsi upheaval -- an occupation which brought much joy and
satisfaction to his heart.
(the biography of Fadil to be continued)
ahang.
=END=
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 95 22:03:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: (fwd) keynote speech from the SED conf in Florida
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Some of our gang are returning back from the SED conference and
report on the tremendous success of this event which saw
participation from 801 believers of 28 countries.
The following is the text of the keynote speech by the Honorable
Fed Deputy Luiz Gushiken who a few years ago was instrumental in
passing a key resolution in the Brazilian congress inspired by
the principles of the Faith and in the Name of Baha'u'llah.
Enjoy it, ahang.
Challenges of the Construction of a New Morality
The Honorable Federal Deputy Luiz Gushiken, Brazilian Chamber of Deputies
The theme I have been asked to address this morning is morals and
ethics. I shall confess to you that I had many difficulties in
preparing myself for this speech. I would ask myself: how should I
address Baha'is on a subject in which THEY are the experts -- so
much so that it's towards their source that I strive to draw closer?
Such being the case, shouldn't I rather be in the audience than at
the podium? But as I said before, Baha'u'llah's legacy does not
belong exclusively to the Baha'is, it is indeed a treasure of the
entire humankind, and I can draw inspiration from His analysis and
doctrine as a bedrock for my presentation.
By the way, concerning the relationship between Baha'u'llah and the
Baha'i Faith, recall Mr. Hooper Dunbar's words, in a very rich
conversation we recently had in Haifa. The honorable member of the
Universal House of Justice told me that the Baha'i Faith was simply
an instrument of Baha'u'llah to establish justice, and should the
Faith fail to achieve this objective, Baha'u'llah would certainly
promote it through other means.
Justice -- this is the word round which everything else revolves.
A synthetic world that embodies the great drama of the contemporary
world -- a world in convulsion, lost in a multiplicty of false and
wayward paths, a world of disharmony, violence, of outrageous wealth
and degrading misery, a world illumined by science, but at the same
time shadowed by darkness of spirit.
This is the picture that brings into focus the moral issue as one of
the central problems at the dusk of this century.
We can certainly discern moral decadence in all countries as a
prominent feature in the current stage of human civilization. For
my country, this crisis can be perceived in the smallest things. In
schools, parents' concerns include not only school dropout, access
to education or the quality of education, but also the drug dealer
stalking students. In the corporate world, employees live in
constant fear of an unemployment that often transforms decent
citizens into society's pariahs. On the streets, the threat of being
robbed forces one to watch out his or her surroundings. When it
comes to families, specially low income families, the breakdown of
their unity is caused by violent fathers who pour out abandoned
children and wives on the streets. In public agencies, generalized
corruption destorys hopes and creates dangerous leadership vacuums.
Not to mention the pitiful situation of misery in which millions of
human beings excluded from markets and culture live.
In many parts of the world, this panorama of moral, political and
social decadence is further aggravated by racial and engender
prejudice and above all, by the belligerance of nationalistic and
religious fanaticism, which bless violence, incite mass movements
and trespass the limits of tolerance.
Despite this tide of events, an important phenomenon can be detected
in the collective human psyche. Whereas people marvel at the so
called economic globalization, there is a certain insensitivity
towards ongoing human tragedies, an inability to discern the complex
causal links involved, and even a skepticism concerning human nature
itself. There is a clear lack of course, of strategic assurance
towards the future. All that remains is the enjoyment of the
moment. To many minds, the tide of events bursting in the world
arena is not the expression of a deep crisis, but rather a trivial
phenomenon.
This feeling of accommodation in the face of the present chaos -- a
kind of social disease -- is the result of the special dynamics that
characterize current events: their unpredictability, velocity and
abundance.
These characteristics make us see world events as being ephemeral.
This impression of fugacity induces us to view such events with a
strange lightness and to absorb them as mere daily facts, no more
than a repetition of facts that have always been present in history.
Thus, the horrors in Biafra, Rwanda, or Bosnia end up being
assimilated as trivial, that is, as transitory and normal incidents,
lightly perplexing, perhaps, but soon to be relegated to oblivion.
If that is the case, then the current world crisis presents an
element that goes beyond the phenonema that engender the crisis,
because it is located in the social psychology of the crisis. And
this social psychology manifests itself in the trivialization of
tragedy, and therefore in the dwarfing of our sense of outrage.
This illustrates how difficult it is to find solutions to our
present problems, because there is no greater tragedy than the
trivialization of tragedy itself.
In the field of economics, the terminology in use shows very well
the limited and tendentious interpretation given to phenomena where
human beings are reduced to mere statistics. (GDP, strong currency
reserves, monetary budget, income per capita, mortality rate, stock
market indices, etc.). This is the realm of the deified market,
where everything is cranked into monetary values. There is no room
for virtues in the "homo economieus". This important field of human
knowledge must needs be remodeled with new elements reaching beyond
traditional paradigms.
A perspective of life that monetizes human relationships can only
result in social fragmentation in a battlefield crowded with
individuals, corporations, nations and blocks of nations and in an
absolute inability to promote social justice.
I refrain from presenting here the data reflecting the reality of
social misery swamping the globe. So vast is their amount that we
are forced to search for other words that may both synthesize them
and expose the full extent of their tragedy.
In a world of exacerbated competition, the values of freedom
transgress the limits of moderation and prudence. Quite often, we
indulge in an individualism that exalts greed and selfishness, and
makes the terrain of social relationships arid and devoid of
cooperation and friendship. The exacerbation of contemporary
individualism seems to be one of the main causes for the deep
suspiciousness permeating human relationships.
Not so long ago, in the former Soviet Union, the raison d'etat
suffocated the individ=13ual dimension of human existence in the
name of a supposedly fairer type of social organization. Indeed,
human spontaneity and creativity had surrendered to fear: Today, the
hegemony of capitalism has reversed the tide. It exalts a false
view of freedom, stretches individualism to an extreme and abandons
social concerns to market forces.
We can even say that these two recent historical experiences
represent two extremes in the quest for an adequate role for the
individual in society. One exalted the uniformization of
individuals, the other, their differences. The former led to the
annihilation of the individual's internal forces, whereas the latter
in taking individual autonomy to an excess and as a result to the
violation of its own limits. The absence of a proper mediation
between the individual and society is conspicuous in both systems --
and it is no coincidence that social deterioration and the loss of
the truly unique potentialities of human beings can be witnessed in
both of them.
It is undeniable that the world today is headed not to civilization
but to barbarism. Everything indicates that we are fastly stepping
towards a critical point of moral, social and political decay.
What shall we do in the face of such titanic problems?
The answer to this question cannot be simplistic. In the moral
area, evidently it is not a matter of correcting deviations by
promulgating a set of moral virtues, an effort that would prove
totally ineffective. In the political arena, it is not about
finding out an enlightened leader, endowed with imperial powers.
Striving to reach a precise diagnosis of the world's situation is a
key strategic issue. If nothing else, a correct diagnosis will
deliver us from perplexity and paralysis as we face the thundrous
events that will seize the world scene until human affairs have a
clearer direction.
I believe that the accuracy of a diagnosis of the present world
situation is also dependent on a correct assessment of what is
collapsing in human institutions.
For centuries humankind lived with the notion that its problems were
to be solved in the scope of its national states. However, with the
progress of science and technology, nations wound up finding
themselves dependent on decisions lying outside their own domain.
More than attesting to the fragility of national states in an
independent world, this fact reveals the extreme necessity of
searching for new institutional forms fitting this new reality -- a
reality in which the flag of world unity, more than a mere appeal
for fraternity, is a vital necessity for putting an end to chaos,
establishing new paradigms and responsibilities.
The quest for this new unity plateau represents a new historical
trend, superior to anything ever built in the past. It carries
with it the most noble social, political and institutional aims,
because it places the entire humankind under the same political and
institutional roof and demands that all members of the human race,
regardless of their origin, enjoy security and peace and have
access, in a just measure, to the wealth produced in the world.
Every effort aimed at building world institutions contributes, thus,
to the acceleration of the delivery process that is afflicting the
end of this century. From the standpoint of practical action, one
must identify, amidst the disorder, those elements expressing
historical trends, refine them with ethical content, and then adopt
them as strategic axes.
Regarding this issue, I'd like to offer some remanrks on an activity
that I have been developing with the precious collaboration of my
Baha'i friends in Brazil.
The friends are aware that Baha'u'llah, in one of His tablets,
mentioned the role of the Americas in the world's destiny. These
words have encouraged me to devise a political project for Latin
America.
A couple of years ago it was established the site of the Latin
American Parliament, in my country, an incipient institution which
has the potential to perform a very important role in the future.
I intend to convince the board of directors of this institution to
convene a Latin-American meeting of NGOs and government officials.
This meeting would address two issues: the first concerns the
implementation of practical measures addressing the major problems
afflicting our continent. The second regards the possibility of
holding a world conference, so that we could discuss in depth the
problems facing humankind. I believe that Latin America, because of
the symbolism associated with it, would be the most appropriate site
for such a conference since most of the major world problems are to
be found in the Northern Hemisphere.
These are just some ideas, but I would like to share with you my
gratitude to the Members of the NSA of Brazil for interacting with
me on such ideas. I am sure that this is a challenge, and as such,
it calls for persistent firmness. I am deeply convinced that, in a
direct and just proportion to my personal efforts, the mysterious
forces of Baha'u'llah will be marching with me.
A lot has been said about the globalization of the economy. It is
the time now for globalizing political institutions as well, and
searching for the values and instruments which can give birth to a
new citizenship, a world citizenship.
My dear friends,
I would like to apologize for dwelling too much on the world crisis
and other related issues, when my topic should be confined to morals
and ethics. Nevertheless, I think that the issue of morals can be
approached in various ways. We could, for instance, discuss how
parents should raise their children, or what a school curriculum
emphasizing character formation in children should look like.
But I wish instead to draw your attention to the following fact: In
a globalized world, the feelings of affection towards different
peoples, different religions, different races is a fundamental
prerequisite for a new mores and ethic that will cement political,
social, and religious relations. Without this broader affection men
will remain the prisoners of past and will continue to engage in
lacking relationships.
When a society is educated so as to show love and respect only to
limited sections of the community, whatever falls outside this
little social universe can easily become the object of hostile
feelings and prejudice. That is the case, for example, with
religious and nationalist feelings. I can be loving with the
members of my religion or nation, and at the same time be hateful
and disrespectful to those who are not part of them. The tragedy in
Bosnia illustrates this fact in both dimensions.
This feeling of a broadened affection or the universalization of
love in the present scene implies, in reality, recognizing that the
dramas and tragedies of other peoples are our own tragedies.
And this is not a challenge at the level of one's awareness or
reason alone. It is about something deeper, the roots of which must
sprout in people's very hearts. Achieving this calls for an
educational endeavor in an infinitely higher scale than that of
traditional education. Conquering this challenge will depend on a
concerted effort by formal structures, such as schools, government
agencies, families, religions, etc, and informal structures such as
the media. It will depend especially on the conduct of leaders who
by their example disseminate trust and promote the assimilation of
these new values.
World citizenship holds, in my estimation, the basis for a new mores
and a new ethic.
I have said that achieving it will depend on vigorous educational
action. In this regard, religion deserves a keener examination. For
in the past, the progress of civilization has always found in the
great religions the foundation for a moral ordering of the peoples.
There has never been a more vitalizing force than the Founders of
the great religions. However, in the contemporary world, religious
institutions have exhausted their energies, have fallen captive to
rituals and outworn traditions, and have succumbed to fundamentalist
wings fermenting within them. Religious fanaticism, with its
violence engendering power, is today the ultimate evidence of the
deep inversion of values in which the world is immersed.
The central issue, therefore, is to know whether humanity will have
a substitute for the role historically performed by religion.
Beginning in the 18th century, the Western world spawned a great
intellectual movement that attempted to build the foundations of
morals solely on reason, with total contempt to revealed religion.
Voltaire the most severe critic of religion, Isaac Newton, Kant,
Hegel, Karl Marx -- these are some of the names who considered if
indispensable to disdain spiritual revelations in order to lay down
the foundation modern knowledge. They considered human progress to
be impossible unless and until dogmas, rituals, religious social
precepts and the influence of the ecclesiastical hierachy were
definitely eradicated from society.
This harsh criticsm was not without justification, since the
religious experience carried in the conscience of that period was
rooted in a vast historical period in which the temporal power of
the church reigned absolute and was even able to impose its dogma
through terror. The inquisition provides the record of the
atrocities ever committed in the history of religious movements.
And all of this in the name of God.
Thus, it was only natural for the philosophers of that time to
shatter those bonds that hindered the advancement of scientific
knowledge. One could say that a process of moral secularization was
started then, is that their criticism pretended to be an absolute
truth general and timeless. From this viewpoint all religions
suffer from the congenital defect of irrationalism, dogmatism,
authoritarianism, and unsolvable contradiction with science. This
view has been prevalent throughout the centuries and has been
strongly influenced an important stratum of society: philosophers
and scientists. These are not necessarily disbelievers in God, they
are disbelievers in religions as being the sole mediators between
the being and its deity. That is they do not understand the
existence of Prophets or Manifestations of God, and consequently do
not apprehend the meaning of the reality of spiritual laws or the
principle of progressivity in religious truth.
This is perhaps the tragedy of human condition at the dusk of this
century. On one side, disbelief, on the other side, fanatical
extremisms and in the middle a great spiritual void. In parallel,
science and technology have reached their pinnacle, but their
uncontrolled use begins to frighten man himself. Man has become his
own hostage. To put in a few words the vital need in this troubled
world, I would say the human being needs to become a homo spiritual,
a man with a new moral foundation.
I believe that the Baha'is do have a proposal that can address this
need. Spread it all over. The world is receptive.
Thank you very much.
=END=
Sub: ... no subject ...
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 00:04:22 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonah Winters
To: talisman
help
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 00:03:27 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonah Winters
To: talisman
Subject: help
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 00:22:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonah Winters
To: talisman
Subject: No need for help!
My _Dummies Guide to the Internet_ said that I can get a complete list of
Majordomo commands by doing that, but (sorry!) I sent them to Talisman
instead of Talisman's Majordomo. Anyway, the info is public information,
so I'll post the list of Majordomo commands next (after I send it to the
right address).
Sure makes for a good subject line though, doesn't it? :-)
-Jonah
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jonah and Kari Winters
33 Endean Avenue / Toronto, Ontario / M4M-1W5 / (416) 461-3527
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 00:28:40 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonah Winters
To: talisman
Subject: Majordomo commands
OK, I wrote to the right address this time. I send this because Saman
asked "And now for the $64,000 question: how did you verify her
subscription?! Ahhh... the mysteries of internet :-)" All of the below is
public information applicable to any Majordomo list-server.
-Jonah
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 00:22:35 -0500 (EST)
From: Majordomo@indiana.edu
To: jwinters@epas.utoronto.ca
Subject: Majordomo results
--
>>>> help
This is Brent Chapman's "Majordomo" mailing list manager, version 1.93.
At Indiana University, Majordomo is used for large and shared mailing
lists. The best way to learn to use Majordomo at IU is via the World
Wide Web, with the UCS Knowledge Base
http://sckb.ucssc.indiana.edu/kb/
Try searching on
Majordomo create ...or...
Majordomo subscribe ...or...
Majordomo configure
Below are some commands which Majordomo understands. These commands
should be sent in the body of a mail message addressed to
majordomo@indiana.edu. Information contained in <> is required, and
set by you. Information contained in []'s is optional. (Do not include
the <> or [] brackets.)
create
To create a list on the Majordomo server at IU (limited to IU
constituents). Immediately following this command should be
e-mail addresses, one on each line.
subscribe []
Subscribe yourself (or if specified) to the named .
unsubscribe []
Unsubscribe yourself (or if specified) from the named .
get
Get a file related to .
index
Return an index of files you can "get" for .
who
Find out who is on the named .
info
Retrieve the general introductory information for the named .
lists
Show some lists housed on IU's Majordomo server. Many lists at
IU are not posted, at the determination of each list's owner.
help
Retrieve this message.
end
Stop processing commands (useful if your mailer adds a signature).
Commands should be sent in the body of an email message to
"Majordomo@majordomo.ucs.indiana.edu".
Commands in the "Subject:" line NOT processed.
If you have any questions or problems, please contact
"majordomo-owner@majordomo.ucs.indiana.edu".
=END=
[end of 12/26/95 session]
Talisman emails received 12/27/95
---------------------------------------------------------
From: Alethinos@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 01:54:44 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Indeed assess/seeping energies
Good evening to Kevin, Terry and all the ships at sea . . .
I have to say that I have been hesitant to discuss details of the
Guardian's vision. One of the main reasons is that it seemed it would be a
huge waste of time while so much energy was being sloughed away on issues
that were at best of a secondary importance. That and the constant harping on
the horrible injustices (those that were legitimate and others seemingly the
porduct of overwrought imaginations) committed by senior institutions left
little doubt that any comprehensive postings would fall on deafend ears . . .
It is late now. Not only by my clock but by the timepiece of the Guardian.
It is so odd. All my Baha'i life I had heard that reading the Guardian was
difficult. Long sentences (complex at that!) Nothing could be further from
the truth. If you read the Guardian as if he were in the room speaking to you
all of a sudden it is as clear as a Spring day. He wrote exactly as he would
have spoken to you. His writing was complicated, simply complex. But each
piece is layed out carefully and clearly. It is firmly linked to the next
thought, and so on until a picture begins to appear.
Nor is his writing static. If you read carefully and listen to the tone of
his writings from the earliest letters in the World Order of Baha'u'llah to
the Divine Art of Living on to The Citiadel of Faith (along with the
complications of individual letters wrtten over decades on particular
subjects) you will see, esp. with regard to North America that the urgency of
his tone continued to increase. He wasn't repeating some simple mantra for
the Baha'is on this continent to follow; he was calling on us to really arise
and begin a spiritual revolution that would be the expanded second Act of the
initial spiritual explosion in Persia only three generations before.
He _never_ expected us to behave as we have. Over and over and over he
referred to us as warriors; the struggle we faced was a battle. He spoke
clearly of the huge amount of opposition we would face - and that this indeed
was one of the prime barometers of how successful we would be in this
struggle. The tone of all his passages indicated that he expected to occur
_now_; or at least in the immediate future. He held out great hope with the
race issue - read the flow of letters compiled in The Power of Unity. They go
from a cautious tone in the late twenties to a wholesale abandonment of
concern regarding how white southerners feelings in the fifties.
Read The Guardian! Really read him and listen to his voice! See his
vision for us and then begin to live it. This was the counsel of Counsellor
Enello to me in '87 and he was right. He said that American Baha'is would
continue to fail and flail until that had absorbed the Guardian's vision.
More later . . .
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
=END=
From: cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca (Christopher Buck)
Subject: Justice for Fadil
To: rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.com (Ahang Rabbani)
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 1:48:29 EST
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Ahang Rabbani writes:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
So, due to lack of interest, I've decided not to discuss Fadil and
Zuhuru'l-Haqq on Talisman, and to continue my efforts of seeking
restoration of justice through private channels.
____________________
RESPONSE
Partial redress for the injustice done to Fadil could be publication
and translation of his work. Also, making his manuscripts accessible to
scholars should be an immediate goal. It seems to me that a letter to the
House is in order. I would support an *Open Letter* to the House signed by
academics (Baha'i and non-Baha'i). I also recommend that Kalimat Press
seek authorization to publish ZH 4 & 5, and permission to commission a
translation of at least an abridgement of these volumes. I'll personally
do whatever I can. I'd like to hear Ahang's thoughts on this proposal, as
well as a detailed description of ZH 4.
-- Christopher Buck
**********************************************************************
* * * * * *
* * * Christopher Buck Invenire ducere est.
* * * Carleton University * * *
* * * Internet: CBuck@CCS.Carleton.CA * * *
* * * P O Box 77077 * Ottawa, Ontario * K1S 5N2 Canada * * *
* * * * * *
**********************************************************************
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 20:24 GMT+1300
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: Alison & Steve Marshall
Subject: Re: INTRUDER ALERT (Klaxons Wailing)
>to get a listing of talisman's members send an email to:
There is a some privacy on this list, though:
Anyone who is not subscribed to Talisman will have their request for a list
of members refused. You need to be subscribed to Talisman and to make the
request from the email address that you receive your Talisman messages from.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alison and Steve Marshall
Email: forumbahai@es.co.nz
90 Blacks Road, Opoho, Dunedin/Otepoti, Aotearoa/New Zealand
--------------------------------------------------------------
=END=
From: cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca (Christopher Buck)
Subject: Re: Indeed assess/seeping energies
To: Alethinos@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 2:24:22 EST
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Jim Harrison writes:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I have to say that I have been hesitant to discuss details of the
Guardian's vision. One of the main reasons is that it seemed it would be a
huge waste of time while so much energy was being sloughed away on issues
that were at best of a secondary importance. That and the constant harping on
the horrible injustices (those that were legitimate and others seemingly the
porduct of overwrought imaginations) committed by senior institutions left
little doubt that any comprehensive postings would fall on deafend ears .
__________________
RESPONSE
With such a dismissive and condescending attitude towards other
legitimate threads, I'm not sure I'm ready for so highhanded a posting on
the Guardian. It's so enlightening to be told that one has an *overwrought
imagination* and *deafend [sic] ears*, and that one's contributions are a
*huge waste of time*. Such a vision of Shoghi Effendi could use a revision
of tone. A contributor ought to engage his/her audience, not alienate it.
-- 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: Geocitizen@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 03:52:59 -0500
To: TLCULHANE@aol.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Indeed assess/seeping energies
Dear Terry,
Your substantial and thoughtful post deserves a well thought out response,
but alas, at present I do not have the resources for that, so please forgive
the brevity of what I am about to write.
You make many points I enthusiastically agree with, such as the fact that the
Baha'i community, especially in America, must abandon every vestige of
dogmatism, orthodoxy, and fear retarding our progress. I would expand on the
areas of our agreement if I had time for a more thorough response...
You also reference Jeffersonian ideals, and the phrase "Life, Liberty, and
the pursuit of Happiness." There are of course important ways in which
Baha'i principles agree with Jeffersonian thought, but I think there are
important divergences which we cannot afford to ignore. To begin with, the
quoted phrase is directly derived from John Locke's triumvirate of inviolable
rights, which he stated as life, liberty, and property.
Perhaps the most important and fundamental disagreement between Baha'i
teachings and Jeffersonian/Lockean thought lies in the conception of human
nature. The Lockean tradition views humans as deeply materialistic, and
incorporates materialism into its conception of justice by stating explicitly
that I have not only a right to own property, but also the right to kill
anyone who attempts to take any of my property. In other words, I am
justified in placing the value of my possessions higher than the value of
your life. (Locke really does say this, and I can dig out my reference for
it if you doubt it. :)
Of course, the Baha'i teachings state the opposite: that humans are
fundamentally spiritual, that self-sacrifice is praiseworthy, that it is
better to die than to kill. There are other, equally important conflicts
between the two value systems, which I hope to develop for you later when I
have more time.
What I am suggesting is that 'Abdu'l-Baha's words of praise for the liberty
of conscience enjoyed by North Americans need not be read as an endorsement
of the entire body of traditional Anglo-American political and social values,
and that the work the Baha'is are called upon to do in North America involves
vindicating some of the more neglected of those values while at the same time
exposing the moral bankruptcy of others which have become prevalent in the
present day. (This is part of what will generate the passionate opposition
that 'Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian foresaw.)
In short, I both agree and disagree with you. I hope I have explained enough
to prevent that summary from sounding wishy-washy. :) But my additional
contributions to this topic will have to wait until I have more time and
greater mental energy available.
Shoulder-to-shoulder with you, even if not exactly eye-to-eye,
Kevin
=END=
From: Geocitizen@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 03:52:53 -0500
To: pjohnson@leo.vsla.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Michelle Maani's case
In a message dated 95-12-26 15:24:11 EST, K. Paul Johnson wrote:
>What about "innocent until proven guilty"? Your position,
>Ahang, is that someone who *might* have *some* connection to
>covenant-breakers (aren't you supposed to be officially
>informed of every person who has been *declared* one?) should
>be *treated* like one as a matter of principle. Until you
>learn for sure otherwise? What a lovely taste of justice in
>the Baha'i worldview!
>
>This really sucks.
In this case I have to agree with most of what our resident Theosophist /
friend of the Faith / loyal opposition has said, with the sole exception of
his associating the treatment of Michelle Ma'ani with "justice in the Baha'i
worldview."
The stance that Ahang and now Marguerite have advocated -- assume the worst
until proven otherwise -- is, I think, a bit extreme. Surely the Covenant is
strong enough to allow us to be courteous to Ms. Ma'ani for a few days,
giving her the benefit of the doubt until we can verify her status as
declared (or not) by the responsible Institutions. Only when and if we have
verified that she has definitely been declared a breaker of the Covenant
should we feel compelled to exhibit the extreme caution Ahang and Marguerite
have called for, and certainly it would have been best had we all avoided
making public what amounts to a tactless and so far almost groundless
assumption that Michelle Ma'ani is a Covenant breaker.
The moderate caution that Brent exhibited at the beginning of all this is, I
think, more defensible. Brent wrote as one who has definite information, and
I think we should respect the fact that he feels bound by conscience to act
based on the information at his disposal. In particular, he quite
understandably broke off the incipient debate on the question of the
Universal House of Justice supposedly interpreting the Texts -- an action I
find understandable because this topic is uncomfortably close to a direct
discussion of the details of attacks that Covenant breakers have made against
the legitimacy of the House, and is thus a discussion our teachings instruct
us to avoid even when no actual Covenant breakers are present.
Because of this, I also find defensible Brent's public posting of his refusal
to continue that discussion, so that the rest of us on Talisman could act
with informed, moderate, tactful caution in our discussions with Ms. Ma'ani
-- regardless of the eventual determination of her official status -- because
of the potential of encountering Covenant-breakers' arguments in those
discussions.
(This is not to say that we should fear and avoid those subjects entirely.
Baha'i scholars must deal with Covenant-breaker material as part of Baha'i
history. But even the most learned and deepened of scholars would do well to
approach this material with informed caution, since the Writings identify it
as spiritually dangerous, and that is why I find Brent's actions defensible.)
In short, I must agree with K. Paul Johnson's lament, and regard the fearful
and tactless reception accorded Michelle Ma'ani as ill befitting Baha'i
standards of courtesy and justice.
Respectfully,
Kevin Haines
=END=
From: "Mark A. Foster"
Subject: Unity in Diversity
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 03:52:32 -0600 (CST)
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Talismanians -
Below is an edited version of a posting I am making on another list:
Renaldo, I agree that what you say is a part of it. However, IMHO,
unity in diversity is the underlying metaphysic of the eternal religion
of God. More specifically, here is how I see it:
Ultimately, true unity is the *Unity of God*. It is the Most Great
Spirit, the Source of all existence, and the Greatest of all unknowable
essences (spirits). It is what the Master, speaking to Laura Clifford
Barney, referred to as the condition of Deity. However, as humans, we
have no way of directly linking with, of loving, or of entering into a
covenantal relationship with the Supreme Reality and Sun of Truth.
Therefore, God manifests His Unity in the Unity of Prophethood (the
condition of Manifestation, the Greater World, or "the divine Appearance
and heavenly Splendor"). It is on this plane of Manifestation where all
the Prophets sit on the same throne, utter the same speech, and proclaim
the same Faith. As the Messengers or Representatives of the innermost
Essence of all things, They are like one soul in one body.
The realm of divine Mediatorship witnesses the highest expression of
`Abdu'l-Baha's statement that nothing can be accomplished without
knowledge, volition, and action. IMHO, these are the three conditions
found in the Kingdom of Manifestation: First, we see the Word of God as
divine Knowledge ("the sumtotal of infinite meanings"). Second, we
encounter the Will of God as divine Volition (love, law, linking,
Covenant, or Revelation). And, finally, we come to recognize the Cause
of God as divine Action (God's causing of creation).
The animating influence, or essence, of the Prophets is the Holy
Spirit - the Purposeful (loving and knowing) power of divine Grace. It
is through the stepped-down emanations of the Holy Spirit (the spirit of
faith, the human spirit, the animal spirit, the vegetable spirit, and
the mineral spirit) that the various conditions of creation (such as the
spiritual kingdom beyond, the spiritual kingdom revealed, the human
kingdom, and the kingdom of names and attributes) come into being and
the Word, Will, and Cause of God (the Image of God) are reflected in
all created realities. The fact that creation is an emanation of the
*manifested* Unity of God results in the unity of humanity and the unity
(vahid) of all things.
In creation, unity appears in diversity and in a virtual panorama of
uniquenesses (not in sameness); and each created thing, when viewed from
the particular standpoint of our material matrix, expresses distinct
names and attributes. Emanations, like paintings, are never the same as
the painter (God manifested). Creation is like an impressionistic piece
of art. It is a divine design. When viewed as a complete picture, with
all the individualities, capacities, interconnections, patterns, colors,
and interconnections, one can get a sense of the how the Blessed, the
Ancient, Beauty reveals Himself in the creative displays. Consultation
and the progressive stages of human unity are signs of the divinely
decreed relations in the pattern of existence.
On another subject, the Foundation for the Science of Reality (FSR),
of which I am the Academic Director, is always looking for new members.
I just returned from the SED conference in Orlando where we were doing
some networking with persons representing various Baha'i-related groups,
institutes, and foundations. The purpose of FSR is to preserve and to
develop the work initiated by Marian Lippitt (whose own work was based
on that of Emogene Hoag, who spent time in the household of the Master)
who chaired the American NSA's National Reference Library Committee. The
attempt is to index the divine Teachings using the basic classifications
of existence explained to us by the Central Figures of the Faith. If you
would like membership information, you may contact me.
With warm regards to all,
Mark
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion (Structuralist) *
*1995 President, 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@johnco.cc.ks.us; Realityman19 (CNet) *
* 72642,3105 (Staff, Three CompuServe Religion Fora); UWMG94A (Prodigy)*
* Realityman (America Online Ethics and Religion Forum Remote Staff) *
*Home Pages: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepage/Science_of_Reality *
* http://home.aol.com/Realityman *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
___
* UniQWK #2141* The manifested Unity of God emanates in His creation's diversity
=END=
From: "Mark A. Foster"
Subject: Unity in Diversity
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 05:35:07 -0600 (CST)
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Talismanians -
Below is an edited version of a posting I am making on another list:
Renaldo, I agree that what you say is a part of it. However, IMHO,
unity in diversity is the underlying metaphysic of the eternal religion
of God. More specifically, here is how I see it:
Ultimately, true unity is the *Unity of God*. It is the Most Great
Spirit, the Source of all existence, and the Greatest of all unknowable
essences (spirits). It is what the Master, speaking to Laura Clifford
Barney, referred to as the condition of Deity. However, as humans, we
have no way of directly linking with, of loving, or of entering into a
covenantal relationship with the Supreme Reality and Sun of Truth.
Therefore, God manifests His Unity in the Unity of Prophethood (the
condition of Manifestation, the Greater World, or "the divine Appearance
and heavenly Splendor"). It is on this plane of Manifestation where all
the Prophets sit on the same throne, utter the same speech, and proclaim
the same Faith. As the Messengers or Representatives of the innermost
Essence of all things, They are like one soul in one body.
The realm of divine Mediatorship witnesses the highest expression of
`Abdu'l-Baha's statement that nothing can be accomplished without
knowledge, volition, and action. IMHO, these are the three conditions
found in the Kingdom of Manifestation: First, we see the Word of God as
divine Knowledge ("the sumtotal of infinite meanings"). Second, we
encounter the Will of God as divine Volition (love, law, linking,
Covenant, or Revelation). And, finally, we come to recognize the Cause
of God as divine Action (God's causing of creation).
The animating influence, or essence, of the Prophets is the Holy
Spirit - the Purposeful (loving and knowing) power of divine Grace. It
is through the stepped-down emanations of the Holy Spirit (the spirit of
faith, the human spirit, the animal spirit, the vegetable spirit, and
the mineral spirit) that the various conditions of creation (such as the
spiritual kingdom beyond, the spiritual kingdom revealed, the human
kingdom, and the kingdom of names and attributes) come into being and
the Word, Will, and Cause of God (the Image of God) are reflected in
all created realities. The fact that creation is an emanation of the
*manifested* Unity of God results in the unity of humanity and the unity
(vahid) of all things.
In creation, unity appears in diversity and in a virtual panorama of
uniquenesses (not in sameness); and each created thing, when viewed from
the particular standpoint of our material matrix, expresses distinct
names and attributes. Emanations, like paintings, are never the same as
the painter (God manifested). Creation is like an impressionistic piece
of art. It is a divine design. When viewed as a complete picture, with
all the individualities, capacities, interconnections, patterns, colors,
and interconnections, one can get a sense of the how the Blessed, the
Ancient, Beauty reveals Himself in the creative displays. Consultation
and the progressive stages of human unity are signs of the divinely
decreed relations in the pattern of existence.
On another subject, the Foundation for the Science of Reality (FSR),
of which I am the Academic Director, is always looking for new members.
I just returned from the SED conference in Orlando where we were doing
some networking with persons representing various Baha'i-related groups,
institutes, and foundations. The purpose of FSR is to preserve and to
develop the work initiated by Marian Lippitt (whose own work was based
on that of Emogene Hoag, who spent time in the household of the Master)
who chaired the American NSA's National Reference Library Committee. The
attempt is to index the divine Teachings using the basic classifications
of existence explained to us by the Central Figures of the Faith. If you
would like membership information, you may contact me.
With warm regards to all,
Mark
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion (Structuralist) *
*1995 President, 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@johnco.cc.ks.us; Realityman19 (CNet) *
* 72642,3105 (Staff, Three CompuServe Religion Fora); UWMG94A (Prodigy)*
* Realityman (America Online Ethics and Religion Forum Remote Staff) *
*Home Pages: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepage/Science_of_Reality *
* http://home.aol.com/Realityman *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
___
* UniQWK #2141* The manifested Unity of God emanates in His creation's diversity
=END=
From: Alethinos@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 09:58:44 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Indeed assess/seeping energies
Mr. Buck feels I have been condescending about other issues here. He assumes
that I have dismissed them as unimportant.
Actually that is not what I have said here or at other times. I have, just
two weeks ago claimed loudly that I enjoy many of the threads here. I
enumerated the contributions from many people that I look forward to reading.
But perhaps I can suggest to Mr. Buck that he step through the past six
months worth of postings and look at the constant hue and cry about scholars
under a mental pogrom. I would hazard a guess that at times this thread took
up 40% of a week's worth of threads. In conjunction to this issues that were
beaten into the ground which have either already been answered (at least for
the time being such as women on the UHJ) or while significant are not at
this time central to the larger issue of America's spiritual destiny.
Nowhere (and I am saying this for the third time in less than a month so
please Mr Buck if you skip everything else read this line) _nowhere_ have I
said that the issues are unimportant. But we have wasted a huge amount of
energy on them.
The *answers* that go begging are all, I firmly contend, wrapped up in
America's spiritual destiny. And as I have also cleary stated before, if we
would indeed begin to seriously address this central issue we would
eventually begin to see these other issues begin to resolve themselves.
But we tend, strongly to follow the AMerican way. We treat Talisman like a
talkshow. Let's all get on, start arguing, go to commercial break (the only
relief we have - Burl) then come back screaming hollaring, pointing,
insisting that WE are the victims over here only to have that countered,
asserting that REALLY there is a conspiracy at the highest level, with some
pathetic please tossed echoing Rodney King . . .
Let's step back from the tube for a moment here . . . what is the source of
most (not all) of the difficulties, trials and tribulations we are facing as
an American community??? Come on folks, lets think here . . . we have a
series of symptoms . . . all with similarities . . . there must be a root
cause. And oddly enough the Guardian already told us what it was . . .
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
=END=
From: "K. Paul Johnson"
Subject: Rhetorical excess
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 10:12:49 EST
It seems to me that both Robert's fulminations against Juan and
the reaction to Michelle on Talisman can be traced to a
systemic infection. Iranian culture, as best I can tell in
translation, is much given to rhetorical excess that can and
often does lead to violence. Because Baha'u'llah, `Abdu'l Baha,
and Shoghi Effendi made extreme, dramatic denunciations of
covenant-breakers, some Baha'is think that their own godliness
can best be demonstrated by extreme, dramatic denunciations of
people, often insinuating that they're covenant-breakers.
That's about as stupid as if I thought I could prove myself a
good Theosophist by chain-smoking hand-rolled cigarettes (a
Blavatskian peculiarity), denouncing missionaries, or otherwise imitating
culturally-derived external traits of Theosophical Founders.
All that excessive rhetoric about covenant-breakers had its
function in its time. There were serious threats to the
Faith's unity throughout its first century, and perhaps people
couldn't be persuaded with a simple, bottom-line message of
"avoid involvement with anyone who tries to usurp authority in
the Faith." IF ONLY Iranian culture had provided Baha'u'llah
et al with a moderate, temperate way of saying things! But it
didn't; it's permeated with extremism from top to bottom as best I can tell.
This has the unfortunate effect of making some Baha'is imitate
such extremism, thinking it's an essential component of Baha'i
spirituality rather than a cultural accident.
One recent example of extreme rhetoric is Robert's
denunciations of various Talismanians. Another showed up
recently on soc.religion.bahai where unnamed miscreants (I bet
the same ones Robert denounces) are denounced as purveyors of
"PSEUDO-BAHA'I" academic studies.
I think, in choosing how to react to circumstances (such as
Michelle's last name) or ideas, Baha'is might do well to ask
themselves: am I unconsciously adopting a nineteenth-century
Iranian tone of rhetorical excess, because I've mistakenly
assumed that it's a divine quality rather than a human
accident? Unfortunately, imitating words and tones leads to
imitating negative emotions and attitudes. Which then produce
more of the same in others.
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 08:47:30
From: "Stockman, Robert"
To: talisman@indiana.edu, "Ahang Rabbani"
Subject: Re[2]: Newcastle Conference
Thanks to Ahang for his many interesting questions.
Ahang asked:
"Dr. Robert Stockman spoke on "The Limits of Discourse
in the Baha'i Community and their Consequences," focusing on the
needs of any community to define boundaries of internal discourse
in order to preserve its unity. He focused on two issues that
have been raised by non-Baha'i critics of the Faith about its
internal discourse: the treatment of Covenant-breakers and the
existence of prepublication review. Continued development of the
review process to make it more consultation-based will resolve
much of the criticism of it."
I like to hear a bit more about these non-Baha'i critics who have raised
these issues about our internal discourse and what sort of things do they
exactly say. What motivates them to focus on these two issues?
Rob speaking here: I think I had Denis MacEoin in mind, primarily, but
as a result of his raising the issue some other academics have started
to ask Baha'is about review. Many anti-Baha'i writers have criticized
the Faith for expelling Covenant-breakers, mostly by arguing that the
head of the Faith had a grudge against them. If you want to know
what non-Baha'i academics say about review, listen to Juan; his
comments epitomize theirs.
"Dr. Moojan Momen presented on
the basis of persecution of the Baha'i Faith in Islamic law by
describing different Islamic legal categories (such as believer,
unbeliever, people of the book, and heretic) and noting how those
categories had been used by Muslims and Baha'is in actual court
cases."
If Rob has kept some brief notes on this presentation, would love to hear
them.
Rob speaking again: it would not be appropriate for me to post my
notes, as they are not as accurate any anything Moojan has written.
Perhaps if you send your request to Moojan, he will post a summary of
his paper (or even the whole thing, if he wants). The same applies to
Nichola Towfiq's paper; it is not wise for me to summarize.
" Sunday morning Stephen Lambden gave a brilliant paper on
"The Position of Mirza Yahya Subh-i-Azal: Some Aspects of Azali
Anti-Baha'i Polemic and Baha'i Apologetics." The paper noted the
critical need to examine the writings of the Bab and Baha'u'llah
in far greater detail, for they will reveal aspects of the
station of Azal usually not considered and will likely make it
clear he was never granted a formal position of successorship by
the Bab; that a life of Yahya and a much more thorough study of
his movement is necessary to correct some misinformation
properly; and that a more thorough examination of Baha'u'llah's
relationship to Yahya will reveal many important details."
Rob may be well aware of this (and if not, Dr. M. Derakhshani (whom I
believe is known to Rob ;-} can provide him with details), about a year
ago, a Persian believer in Australia wrote a massive book on Azal and
Azalis, drawing from a large body of Tablets, including extensive study
of the Kitab-i Badi` (Baha'u'llah's most important response to Azali
charges). I'm only mentioning this as Rob may wish to put Lambden in
touch with this Australian researcher so they can collaborate and
synergies.
Rob speaking: I'll talk to Dr. Derakhshani--my wife will be staying in
his condo tomorrow and Thursday nights, until he returns from
Arizona!--and get the name of this believer, to pass on to Steve. I
think Steve is on Talisman, so he may be able to post his own
comments.
Question for Rob: what are the plans for publishing these papers? And
also will the papers from the previous 7 Irfan conferences be published
as well?
Rob replies: The first volume of papers--from the first two of our
conferences, and on scripture--has been edited and I think we will be
ready to publish it this year. The second volume--on the Aqdas--we
hope to edit soon (now that we have a system for doing it, it should
go faster). A third volume--on anti-Baha'i polemic--will follow and
will include papers from our upcoming Wilmette conference.
Three of our conferences have been in Persian, and I do not know what
the plans for publishing those papers are, as I do not handle that
aspect of the program. I am speaking about our English colloquia
only, of which five colloquia have already been held.
-- Rob Stockman
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 10:48:54 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: lua@sover.net (LuAnne Hightower)
Subject: Zuhuru'l Haqq
Dear Ahang,
Please, please, please don't be silent. This matter is of great interest to
me. I don't have much to offer in the way of insights, as I am unfamiliar
with the territory, but I, too, find it fascinating. It occurs to me that
perhaps the thread on the Encyclopaedia may have had some influence in the
NSA decision to revivie the project. Insha'llah, the current thread may do
the same for this important piece of work. I hope for that, at least.
Topics such as this, although I am unlikely to post my inadequate responses,
enlarge my perspective, provoke my own private struggles with the amount of
(apparent) control being exercised over the community, and teach me much.
My silence is not indicative of anything but my own lack of time (I have
printed out every last posting on this topic and taken it home to study at
my leisure) and adequate words.. Thank you for all of your efforts to bring
this into the light of day
Kindest Regards,
LuAnne
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 09:54:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: America's Spiritual Destiny
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Dear Jim,
I appreciate your comments about the importance of reading Shoghi
Effendi and as I find him at the center of my spiritual life too and
it is through him that I find my path to Baha'u'llah.
I also agree with Chris that while it was not your intention to
belittle other threads, or legitimate concerns of many on Talisman, it
is possible to read a dismissal of "other" people's concern in your
post. Just a hint perhaps? Anyway, its water under the bridge and we
need not dwell on it. Let's move on...
Let me state my belief about the America's spiritual destiny, and I'll
do so in a way to provoke a response from you ;-}
I believe America's spiritual destiny is already fulfilled.
I don't know of anything in the Guardian's writings that speaks to our
situation, namely, 1996 and beyond, except some broad statements (e.g.
the Citadel of the Faith, pages 30-31 or thereabouts) about the
efforts of the American Baha'i community will merge with that of the
nation as a whole to bring about the Most Great Peace -- an event
which is not destined to happen for 6 or 7 more centuries.
So, help me to understand, what is there to speak of by the *present*
generation?
On one hand we have all these statements of the Guardian about the
importance of the task of this country, which seem to me to be all
fulfilled, and on there hand we have statements that has nothing to do
with us as it will happen many centuries after the present generation
is all but dust.
To me, America's spiritual destiny is a non-issue.
In other words, the task of the present generation of the American
believers is no more sacred or special than any other nation on this
planet.
Again, please understand that I stating my position in a manner to
invoke a response and by no means do I mean to belittle the suggested
thread -- in fact, I very much look forward to your (and other
people's) response which I hope is accompanied by chapter and verse,
as oppose to what we personally are inclined to believe.
much love, ahang.
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 11:08:04 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: Re: Rhetorical excess
Paul,
I am *extremely* disappointed.
What is "violent" about not talking to someone? That is basically
what Brent suggested and Ahang echoed.
Now you use your familiar tool of hitting below the belt while
seeming to be an objective outsider.
sAmAn
=END=
From: Dave10018@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 12:54:46 -0500
To: cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The Religion of Coffee
In a message dated 95-12-23 13:57:24 EST, cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca (Christopher
Buck) writes:
>
> THE RELIGION OF COFFEE
>
> The swift shadow of a bluejay slid
> Into our own leaves which tumble
> To quack after heels that surprise
> A stallion, snatching pasture
> Leagues from the soft-steel sea
> As westward shrunk the bluejay's sun
> Skies away from trains and wolves
> That wail where dynasties of light
> Fall where we breathe cedar
> To become one day more wise.
>
> The religion of coffee over campfire
> Cowboy-style in creekwater baptism
> Where logic topples into purple
> Fire under a tin pan in a golden moment.
> Coffee invents you anew
> As you tip your mug, breathe steam
> Precisely why you are the sky
> Beside my coffee inside my eyes.
>
> The heart of autumn is this ritual.
> Tar-dark obsidian paints our faces
> In mystic steam and obsidian sheen
> Multiplies our smiles on the coffee vision
> By hills which dive into each other
> Or into a sparrohawk's eye.
> Sanity, the salute of beauty.
>
> -- Christopher Buck
>
>************************************************************
Fine poem, Christopher. I just wanted to praise it and see it on the list by
itself, rather than at the end of something else.
We need more poetry here.
David Taylor
=END=
From: Dave10018@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 12:56:01 -0500
To: Alethinos@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: As our energies seep away . . .
Jim, some months ago I did respond seriously to your posts on this subject. I
can repost my analysis of the Gaurdian's discussion of decadeence, if you
like. As you recall I demonstrated that Shoghi Effendi wrote about the
present crisis of civilization as the inevitable result of the
deligitimazation of traditional authority. I showed that in World Order of
Baha'u'llah and The Promised Day Is Come, among other places, Shoghi Effendi
uses a metaphor of decadence to deescribe this process. His analysis does
not fit at all with your "axiololgical" metaphor. When I posted this
analysis you rsponded with irrelevencies and distortions. When I corrected
you, you admitted some of my points and distorted others, claiming to agree
with me although I was refuting your position. When I pointed out the
irrelevency and weakness of your reply you lapsed into silence.
In my view people don't respond to you because responding to you seems to be
a waste of time.
I hesitate to respond to you myself. I will not put much time into it.
I will say I am tired of cliches conflating serious attempts to ameliorate
tragedies of violence and drug abuse and to popularize methods both of
therapuetic intervention and of self-help with their vulgarization in the
hands of Rikki Lake and Gordon Eliot and other tv talkmeisters. These
methods properly understood, allow individuals to--extend-- their ability to
take responsibility for their actions, rather than, as you would have us
believe, avoid it. I have written at length as well on the recovery movement
and your misrepresentation of it. I no longer have those posts on disk, but
others do.
Your blanket dismissal of sixty years of American public policy (you spoke
of the government "throwing money at problems") is another tiresome cliche.
These programs, especially the postwar GI bill and Lyndon Johnson's war on
poverty, were partially successful, and involved a great deal of thought and
effort. The tragedies of their partial failure and their need for revision
and extension and greater resources cannot be overestimated. You apparently
have never known anyone associated with these efforts. My father began his
career in public service as director of the Somerville Housing Authority in
1948. They built the first public housing for the elderly in the U.S.
He also worked for the New Haven redevelopment agency. As a private
developer in 1960 he built the first integrated apartment units in the
District of Columbia, pressuring John Kennedy into promulgating an open
housing ordinance. From 1966-68 my father was assistant secretary of the
department of Housing and Urban Development in charge of the Model Cities
program. You should be more careful than to parrot here what amounts to a
Rush Limbaughism. For someone so scornful of TV talk shows you sound an
awful lot like talk radio.
As for my discussion of sexuality, I would hope that people would refer to
the original posts rather than your inadequate and slanted summary.
happy new year!
david taylor
=END=
From: "K. Paul Johnson"
Subject: Re: Rhetorical excess
To: Saman Ahmadi
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 12:48:59 EST
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
According to Saman Ahmadi:
>
>
> Paul,
>
> I am *extremely* disappointed.
>
> What is "violent" about not talking to someone? That is basically
> what Brent suggested and Ahang echoed.
Never said it was. I did say that Baha'is characteristically
overreact, inflating their reactions due to the rhetorical
excess to which they have become accustomed. To assume someone
guilty until proven innocent, based on a name, is an
overreaction. But not near the extremity of Robert's remarks,
which were the main target of my observation.
>
> Now you use your familiar tool of hitting below the belt while
> seeming to be an objective outsider.
Please define how I have hit below the belt, and how this is a
"familiar tool." What do you perceive me as trying to
accomplish? A tool, after all, is used to accomplish
*something.*
>
> sAmAn
>
>
>
=END=
From: cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca (Christopher Buck)
Subject: Re: America's Spritual Destiny
To: Alethinos@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 12:49:46 EST
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Fair enough, Jim. Thank you for your cool, even-keeled response.
I'm not sure that I agree with my brother Ahang that America's spiritual
destiny is a non-issue. So I would like to pose two questions:
(1) In *Messages to America*, the beloved Guardian states that the
Baha'is of America (or the world) may actually *hasten* the Lesser Peace.
Never have I seen a communication from an NSA or Haifa that has
enlarged on this overlooked statement. (This is not institution-bashing,
but merely an observation.)
I'm sure you'll agree that this statement by the Guardian has
implications of world-historical proportions.
So, Jim, how do we *hasten the Lesser Peace*?
(2) Finally, are not Native Americans and Native Canadians integral
to America's spiritual destiny?
-- 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: Member1700@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 13:32:51 -0500
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Kwanzaa is coming
I am still not getting my Talisman messages :-(
I suppose that John is still out of town and hasn't been able to put me back
in the system yet. John, are you there? So, this is a "blind" message to
Talisman just to let everyone know that Kwanzaa is coming.
(By the way, I used to be the only black Baha'i on Talisman, though since
then there have been a couple of others on and off. How about now? If
anyone is out there, please send me a private e-mail.)
Kwanzaa is a new African-American holiday that is beginning to gain
acceptance in some parts of the black community here. It was started in the
1970s, I think, in Los Angeles and is supposed to be a celebration of
African-American culture and community. For the past three or four years, my
Baha'i community has sponsored an "Interracial Celebration of Kwanzaa" which
has been very successful in attracting attention and seekers.
Since one of the themes of Kwanzaa is "umoja" (Swahili for
unity--meaning, of course, unity of family, community, and race . . . which
we extend just slightly to the unity of all humanity) our Kwanzaa celebration
is dedicated to unity and fits very nicely with Baha'i themes. This year I
am going to try the idea of responsive readings--using some Baha'i quotations
on unity in a call and response format with the audience. It can be very
effective.
Anyway, as some of you know, I think that the Baha'is in the United
States should start observing this new holiday in our own way and simply
capture it for our own--as a celebration of interracial unity and a salute to
black culture. The time is quite ripe. And while such a strategy would
infuriate black nationalists--which is OK with me--it would do a lot to place
us in the mainstream of African-American life in this country. I think it
would go over big.
Anyway, I will let you know how the celebration turns out. We will hold
ours on January 1, when Kwanzaa is officially over (it runs between Christmas
and New Years) but when everyone can come.
Warmest,
Tony
=END=
From: cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca (Christopher Buck)
Subject: Re: Kwanzaa is coming
To: Member1700@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 13:42:04 EST
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Tony writes:
^^^^^^^^^^^
Anyway, as some of you know, I think that the Baha'is in the United
States should start observing this new holiday in our own way and simply
capture it for our own--as a celebration of interracial unity and a salute to
black culture. The time is quite ripe.
___________
RESPONSE
What would be wrong with re-dating *Race Unity Day* to coincide
with *Kwanzaa*? Just an idea.
-- 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: cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca (Christopher Buck)
Subject: Hunting While Young
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 13:34:47 EST
Cc: cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca (Christopher Buck)
HUNTING WHILE YOUNG
In the most suspicious of orchards
We knew well the meaning of snakes rib-footed
under snarled flocs of fog belly conformed
To rocks and mist peers in sundrenched skins
Of branch-cast apples drawing red-eye flies and hunted bucks
My brother and I appreciating moments with a stranger
Who must have been our father
Cocked death in his fists as we held our breath
To petrify meat that would be us eventually
Stepping cautiously into our eyes reflect magnificent antlers
On a beaming rifle lightning-pregnant
Glaucous with moon in the morning cold of Loma Prieta
Into focus, branches grew antlers more defined and our father
Knew a neck that stetched to sustain itself
With an apple and swallowed whole a sting of stone, thrown
With such speed that could not be believed for long
And two apples fell at the neck of the buck
Who was to become a part of us as if
That's all that mattered. And on Bear Island
Six more legs and arms of shot to subtract rabbits
From castles of cattails marching through marsh darting
Dragonflies We grew heavier with boots fat with mud
And knew success involved death and wonder
What about Crusader Rabbit or Peter Cottontail
Or rabbit in Winnie-the-Pooh? on Bear Island
We were scared to cry when thunder quaked in spastic legs
And scuts tumbled clumsily Knife unsheathed the stranger
Who must have been our father quietly kneeled.
-- Christopher Buck
**********************************************************************
* * * * * *
* * * Christopher Buck Invenire ducere est.
* * * Carleton University * * *
* * * Internet: CBuck@CCS.Carleton.CA * * *
* * * P O Box 77077 * Ottawa, Ontario * K1S 5N2 Canada * * *
* * * * * *
**********************************************************************
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 13:04:00 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: Re: Rhetorical excess
I am going to be venting so I hope John is back from Michigan.
On Wed, 27 Dec 1995, K. Paul Johnson wrote:
> According to Saman Ahmadi:
> >
> >
> > Paul,
> >
> > I am *extremely* disappointed.
> >
> > What is "violent" about not talking to someone? That is basically
> > what Brent suggested and Ahang echoed.
> Never said it was.
Maybe my English is not good (or is it "my Engglish is not well"?) but
that is what I understood from post which I have unfortuantely deleted.
>I did say that Baha'is characteristically
> overreact, inflating their reactions due to the rhetorical
> excess to which they have become accustomed.
This is an outrageous observation from someone who stopped just
short of likening Shoghi Effendi to Michael Corleone.
(The above is however a proof of my Iranian blood. BTW,
are "facscists" and "Leninist" also considered
excess rhetoric?)
> To assume someone
> guilty until proven innocent, based on a name, is an
> overreaction.
It is a measured response - as I mentioned, questioning
the authority of UHJ as Ms. Ma'ani does go to the heart
of hers and mine relative, Jamishid Ma'ani's, piffle - have you
considered that may be others know more about the
situation and are refraining from speaking?
>But not near the extremity of Robert's remarks,
> which were the main target of my observation.
>
That was not clear in your post - however, it seems to
me that Robert was merely exercising his right to be
true his conscience (I don't agree with the substance
of what he was saying or its tone and have said so
publically before.)
> >
> > Now you use your familiar tool of hitting below the belt while
> > seeming to be an objective outsider.
> Please define how I have hit below the belt, and how this is a
> "familiar tool."
A good number of participants on Talisman are Iranian. In the
minds of western pop-media, Iranians (and Middle Easterners
in general) are out of control maniacs. Your are equating
the actions of Baha'is on Talisman with what you are seeing
on television - sad, very sad, especially since many of the
the people here have been on the receiving end of physical
and viloence which you so liberally attribute to a culture.
No one is saying that Iranians are angels, but one should
not forget that the history of many people has included violence.
Or are your trying to say that Iranians have been/are
disproportionally (sp?) violent?
Examples: your quarrels with the person Shoghi Effendi.
>What do you perceive me as trying to
> accomplish? A tool, after all, is used to accomplish
> *something.*
I have no earthly idea.
sAmAn
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 11:43:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu, member1700@aol.com
Subject: publication of Zuhuru'l-Haqq volumes
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Chris Buck wrote:
> Partial redress for the injustice done to Fadil could be
> publication and translation of his work. Also, making his
> manuscripts accessible to scholars should be an immediate goal.
> It seems to me that a letter to the House is in order. I would
> support an *Open Letter* to the House signed by academics
> (Baha'i and non-Baha'i). I also recommend that Kalimat Press
> seek authorization to publish ZH 4 & 5, and permission to
> commission a translation of at least an abridgment of these
> volumes. I'll personally do whatever I can. I'd like to hear
> Ahang's thoughts on this proposal, as well as a detailed
> description of ZH 4.
Obviously, we are all deeply grateful for Chris's continued
interest in ZH's and let me share a few thought.
1. I really don't think we should send an open letter, as such a
thing may be misconstrued as "petitioning". I am about to send a
letter to the House on this subject, which yesterday I posted its
main paragraphs -- and would welcome comments on it before its
sent, but I really don't suggest signing it by more than one
person.
2. I believe the Baha'i publishers are missing the boat by not
publishing the Persian original of these books. Contrary to the
popular belief that Persian books don't have a big market, it
seems that recent experience of both Canadian and Swiss
publishers have shown otherwise. Landegg prints 1500 copies of
their "Khushiha" series and they are mostly out of print.
So, I suggest to Kalimat and Oneworld, who both happen to be on
Talisman, to think seriously about the publication of ZH series
(at least reprint of ZH-3) in original Persian. Also, ZH-4 would
make an outstanding addition and I believe due to Fadil's
reputation will have an excellent market. Incidentally, the cost
of printing of the ZH-3 and ZH-4 should be minimal because both
can be printed as they are.
I hope that Tony and Novin will give this matter some thought and
if they wish, we can discuss it further off line.
3. I can't make a comment about ZH-5, as I don't believe a copy
exists in North America or Europe. I believe the sole copy may
be in Haifa, but I can't say for sure. But there are many copies
of ZH-4 floating around. I think its a tremendously important
book. It provides many details that Balyuzi's "Baha'u'llah, the
King of Glory" does not. It provides Text of some Tablets which
are otherwise not available -- at least not to me. But its
import lies in its detail treatment of history of the Cause in
the years 1852-1864. Its serious scholarship on par with
Balyuzi's and I would have no hesitation recommending its
translation. I'm against *partial* translation though as the
reader will always be left with distorted picture. If you like
to leave out the Tablets, that's fine, but please don't cut the
narrative.
The main reason that I strongly support translation of ZH-4 and
ZH-5, is that we have only a single volume on the life of
Baha'u'llah, namely, Balyuzi's book. There are really no other
serious scholarship being done on Baha'u'llah's life. Dr. David
Ruhe tells me that his book (second volume in the Robe of Light
series, covering Baghdad period) is sent to editors now and will
be out shortly. I greatly enjoyed his first volume and look
forward to his second (and hopefully third). But there is very
little *new* information in the Robe of Light series as the
author does not read Persian/Arabic. So, I ask, what serious
book (besides Balyuzi's) can we point to for the life of
Baha'u'llah?
Therefore, the issue is not just the question of having a
market, etc. We have a moral obligation to publish ZH volumes as
a token of our desire to better understand the life of Supreme
Manifestation of God.
So, I hope that careful consideration be given by our publishers
and scholars in providing the rest of us with a deeper knowledge
of Baha'u'llah's life.
lovingly, ahang.
=END=
From: "K. Paul Johnson"
Subject: Re: Rhetorical excess
To: Saman Ahmadi
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 14:47:51 EST
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
According to Saman Ahmadi:
>
>
> I am going to be venting so I hope John is back from Michigan.
> > >
> > > What is "violent" about not talking to someone? That is basically
> > > what Brent suggested and Ahang echoed.
> > Never said it was.
>
> Maybe my English is not good (or is it "my Engglish is not well"?) but
> that is what I understood from post which I have unfortuantely deleted.
No; I said that Iranian culture was permeated with rhetorical
excess which sometimes led to violence. That was the extent of
mentioning violence.
>
> >I did say that Baha'is characteristically
> > overreact, inflating their reactions due to the rhetorical
> > excess to which they have become accustomed.
>
> This is an outrageous observation from someone who stopped just
> short of likening Shoghi Effendi to Michael Corleone.
>
> (The above is however a proof of my Iranian blood.
You know very well that my observation had nothing to do with
ethnicity, and was entirely a matter of culture. Since the
primary practitioner of rhetorical excess I identified was not
Iranian, and the whole thrust of my post was that non-Iranian
Baha'is adopted rhetorical excess NOT KNOWING its cultural
roots, you are looking for offense where none was intended. As
for the Corleone bit, really. I never saw the Godfather movies
but assumed he killed off his rivals? Whereas my comment about
Shoghi Effendi was that he got rid of them via
excommunication. This is a matter of history and not a matter
of my likening anyone to any fictional character.
BTW,
> are "facscists" and "Leninist" also considered
> excess rhetoric?)
You are obviously carrying a grudge over something someone
said. I never called Baha'is either of those (oxymoronic if
said together) words. Perhaps I said that the totalitarian
expectations of what the New World Order will be like remind me
of other forms of totalitarianism.
>
> It is a measured response - as I mentioned, questioning
> the authority of UHJ as Ms. Ma'ani does go to the heart
> of hers and mine relative, Jamishid Ma'ani's, piffle - have you
> considered that may be others know more about the
> situation and are refraining from speaking?
>
That leaves the rest of us in the dark, doesn't it?
> >But not near the extremity of Robert's remarks,
> > which were the main target of my observation.
> >
> That was not clear in your post - however, it seems to
> me that Robert was merely exercising his right to be
> true his conscience (I don't agree with the substance
> of what he was saying or its tone and have said so
> publically before.)
>
Accusations of the sort he was making may or may not be within
anyone's rights. Most Baha'is agree that they violate the
rights of those targeted by him, as best I can gauge the
discussion. The Theosophical equivalent is to attribute
someone's actions to his/her being a tool of the Brothers of
the Shadow. Most of us would consider that kind of accusation
to exceed the limits of civilized discourse and violate the
rights of those accused.
> > >
> > > Now you use your familiar tool of hitting below the belt while
> > > seeming to be an objective outsider.
> > Please define how I have hit below the belt, and how this is a
> > "familiar tool."
>
> A good number of participants on Talisman are Iranian. In the
> minds of western pop-media, Iranians (and Middle Easterners
> in general) are out of control maniacs. Your are equating
> the actions of Baha'is on Talisman with what you are seeing
> on television -
No, I am not. I am attributing the excessive rhetoric-- to
call a spade a spade the ABUSE that Baha'is throw at one
another-- to a distorted, misunderstood imitation of a culture
trait.
sad, very sad, especially since many of the
> the people here have been on the receiving end of physical
> and viloence which you so liberally attribute to a culture.
>
> No one is saying that Iranians are angels, but one should
> not forget that the history of many people has included violence.
> Or are your trying to say that Iranians have been/are
> disproportionally (sp?) violent?
I don't know that. I do know that the ranting and raving about
how evil someone is and how much God wants to harm them is
something I've seen more in Baha'i scriptures than any other.
My presumption is that the same rhetoric is found in Shi`ite
sources with which I'm unfamiliar, whence it was adopted in
Babi and Baha'i works. Of course the same is found in Christian,
Jewish, Hindu cultures, but not to the same extent in the
sources I have read.
>
> Examples: your quarrels with the person Shoghi Effendi.
>
> >What do you perceive me as trying to
> > accomplish? A tool, after all, is used to accomplish
> > *something.*
>
> I have no earthly idea.
You are reacting as if you do, and it's very nefarious. All I
am trying to do is understand what's going on in the Baha'i
world and why. And to share some insights which may inspire
further discussion.
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 13:27:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu, member1700@aol.com
Subject: suggested books for translation
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
The recent discussion on possible translation and publication of
Zuhuru'l-Haqq series (particularly about the life of Baha'u'llah)
got me thinking that actually there a number of books, mostly
already published in Iran, that a translation of them in English
will provide a much deeper knowledge about the life of the
Central Figures of our Faith.
Note that on purpose I have excluded items related to the Babi
Dispensation as a number of these manuscripts are being
translated by Amanat/Neshati and other individuals (including
yours truly). So, this list is limited to items on the life of
Baha'u'llah, Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi.
1. Abu'l-Fadl, Mirza, Tarikh-i-Zuhur Dianat Hadrat-i-Bab va
Hadrat Baha'u'llah.
This is a short (about 100 pages) history of the Twin
Manifestations written by Mirza Abu'l-Fadl while staying at the
GreenAcres. The translator must be familiar with Abu'l-Fadl's
style. Suggest Khazi` Fananapazier or Juan Cole.
2. Afnan, Mirza Habibu'llah, Khatirat-i-Hayat (early years and
visit to Baha'u'llah).
This is a 200 page manuscript about the Afnans visit of 1891-2 to
Akka/Haifa and Baha'u'llah's last year on earth. It also
includes much new information on the Bab, His wife, early
believers, and the chain of events which led Abdu'l-Baha to go
public on Mirza Muhammad-Ali's situation -- Mirza Habib Afnan was
the very *first* person to whom Abdu'l-Baha related the details
of Covenant-breaking activities of Baha'u'llah's family.
This manuscript combined with portions of the same author's
Tarikh-i-Amri Fars-va-Shiraz, would make one of the most
important publications of the late 20th century.
3. Afrukhtih, Yunis, Khtirat-i-Nuh Salih, USA, 1983, 572 pages
One of the most detailed narratives on the life of the Master
post 1892 period. If interested in publishing, suggest contact
the World Centre first as there may be ownership issues with the
author's daughter. Dr. Yunis Khan was a secretary of the Master
for many years and related many, many daily events of the 9 years
he was with Him. Rumor has it that a draft translation may
already exist.
4. Avarih, Abdu'l-Husayn, Kavikibu'l-Durrih, v. 1, Egypt, 1923,
537 pages
and
Avarih, Abdu'l-Husayn, Kavikibu'l-Durrih, v. 2, Egypt, 1341 H,
347 pages
These two volumes are among the most important historical works
of the Faith and both were edited and approved by the Master.
They are superb in composition and contents. Since Avarih's
defection, these books have been out of favor with Persian
Baha'is, but in my view they constitute key historical work of
the period. Contains many original documents.
4. Avarih, Abdu'l-Husayn, Ihtifal Sar-i-Sal Su`ud-i-Hadrat-i-
`Abdu'l-Baha, 1922, 51 pages, (w/ section by Muniriyh-Khanum)
A brief narrative on the anniversary of Abdu'l-Baha's passing
(Nov 1922) and a most moving essay by His widow on missing Him.
5. Bayda, Tarikh-i-Shuhaday-i-Yazd (Tarikh-i-Bayda), 400 pages
A massive history on the martyrs of Yazd which has nothing to do
with the life of Baha'u'llah or Abdu'l-Baha and I'm only
mentioning it because of the Master's cherished desire to see
this book published. Please somebody publish it and fulfill His
hope.
6. Bushru`i, Mirza Badi`, Nuzdah Sal Shadmani, 400 pages.
This book (by Prof Suheil Bushru'i's father) recounts 19 years of
being with Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi. I started its
translation a couple years ago, but soon got distracted by some
other unfinished projects. It has less concrete information that
either Habib's or Dr. Yunis Khan's, but his love for the Master
shines through every page. Its most worthwhile translation work.
Don't recomment publication in the original because of the
composition style.
7. Khadim, Zikru'llah, Bayad-i-Mahbub, Iran, 131 BE, 402 pages
Next to Priceless Pearl, its the most comprehensive history of
the beloved Guardian written from the perspective of someone who
was in love with Shoghi Effendi. Many details of Shoghi
Effendi's dealings with Iranian NSA and Baha'i community there.
Rumor had it that Riaz Khadem intended on translating this, but I
don't know if it ever happened.
8. Mahmudi, Hushang, Yad-dashtihayi Darbarih Hadrat-i
`Abdu'l-Baha, vol 1, Iran, n.d., 538 pages
and
Mahmudi, Hushang, Yad-dashtihayi Darbarih Hadrat-i `Abdu'l-Baha,
vol 2, Iran, 130 BE, 500 pages
Here we have over 1000 pages of very detailed information of
Abdu'l-Baha collected from a variety of sources. Will immensely
enrich Baha'i literature in English on the life of the Master.
9. Malik-Khusravi, M.A., Iqlim-i-Nur, Iran, 118 BE, 290 pages
A detail description on the family of Baha'u'llah by one of
ablest historians of the Faith. MK, a relative of Baha'u'llah
himself, provides a very detailed information on His relations,
both the faithful and otherwise. A good chunk of its
information, I translated for my "Twin Surging Seas" book --
another unfinished book! Rumor has it that a more detailed
version was prepared but never printed. Suggest if you're
interested in translating this item, to check with the World
Centre about the more complete manuscript.
10. Malamiri, Haj Muhammad-Tahir, Khatirat-i-Malamiri, Germany,
1992, 337 pages
Second half is all Tablets addressed to the author, which I don't
think needs to be translated at this time. But the first half is
his memories of Baha'u'llah and many other events in Iran. Come
to think of it, all worthwhile sections are already translated by
Taherzadeh in his "Revelation" series. So forget it.
11. Mazandarani, Fazil; Zuhuru'l-Haq, v. 3, 554 pages
What can I say! A masterpiece.
12. Mazandarani, Fazil; Zuhuru'l-Haq, v. 4, 394 pages
Covers 1852 to 1864 period. I've already talked briefly about
its contents.
13. Mazandarani, Fazil; Zuhuru'l-Haq, v. 6, 1051 pages
My copy is so bad, I nearly went blind reading it. It talks
about some 150 key believers during the time of Baha'u'llah.
Many unfinished biographies of the Babi figures, are completed
here. Truly a masterpiece.
14. Mu`ayyad, Habib, Khatirat-i-Habib, v. 1, Iran, 118 BE, 537
pages
and
Mu`ayyad, Habib, Khatirat-i-Habib, v. 2, Iran, 129 BE, 408 pages
Again, Dr. Mu'ayyad was a secretary of the Master and relates a
wealth of information. I'm very surprised that this book hasn't
been translated so far. Its an incredible pilgrimage to the
Master.
15. Muniriyh-Khanum, Mukhtasari az Tarikh Hayat va Tashruf bi
Ard-i-Aqdas, Haifa, 1934, 41 pages
A short narrative telling of the events leading to her marriage
and bit beyond.
16. Nabil-`Azam, Mulla Muhammad, Mathnavi dar Tarikh-i-Amr
Baha'i va Tarikh Su`ud Hadrat-i-Baha'u'llah, Egypt, 1924, 112
pages
Nabil tells the history of Baha'u'llah (and actually a bit
earlier) in form of poetry. His description of Baha'u'llah's
passing is among the most moving passage, I've ever read by
anyone. It will be hard to translate as the person must have
poetic abilities, but it will be among the treasures of the
Faith.
There are many other excellent books on the life of these
Figures, but the above should serve as what I consider to be the
most important items meriting translation.
If anyone got really serious about such a effort, I strongly urge
you to first consult the Research Dept at the World Centre as
they have a much better feel for what should be translated, and
what translation works is already being carried out (to avoid
duplication of efforts).
I also suggest team work on translation by pairing a Persian
believer with a native English speaking.
love, ahang.
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 13:10:25 -0800
To: Member1700@aol.com, Talisman@indiana.edu
From: margreet@margreet.seanet.com (Marguerite K. Gipson)
Subject: Re: Kwanzaa is coming
Hello Tony... Kwanza out here in the Pacific Northwest, Kwanza has been on
fire since its start out of the 1968 Civil Rights march... I spent time in
Atlanta back in 1990 for the 30th year of the start of the Civil Rights
movement. Also to coincide with the ABS Conference on Model of Racial
Unity. Kwanza as it is spelled out here, started from that Civil Rights
Movement. As a white female I have seen the ceremonies many times, and
have been with friends during this time of their year... I have celebrated
with them, as they have with me during our Baha'i Holy Days. In fact, I
dated a man, single at the time, who did not know about Kwanzaa until I
showed to him a book I purchased on the topic. He read it, and now has the
celebrations in his home, with his wife.... and 5 kids.
Part of the problem I see is that with Christmas, there is some tradition...
within families... and with Easter--do you know how they decide on what date
to place Easter?? We can't equate our Holy Days with the others, as we have
no *form* or *rituals* in the Bahai Faith. How do you celebrate the 12
days of Ridvan, 3 days of which work is to be suspended?? (Open for
suggestions) With Christmas--lights and a tree, Easter--- the bunny,
eggs, and a hunt..... Valentines day is another *holiday* after the St.
Valentine--a old Christian saint..... Flowers, Candy, and some erotic
texture added to it.
Yet, we have to make our Holy Days special and with spirit, so even without
the *glitz and glitter* our friends walk away with something from the heart
that touches them for life.
Warmly, Margreet
Oh, Easter---that is decide by--- Easter will be the first Sunday, after the
first full moon, after the spring Equinox.... Which is March 21--always on a
week day... so Easter can be anywhere between March 23rd and April 30...but
rarely on that last Sunday in April....
At 01:32 PM 12/27/95 -0500, Member1700@aol.com wrote:
>I am still not getting my Talisman messages :-(
>I suppose that John is still out of town and hasn't been able to put me back
>in the system yet. John, are you there? So, this is a "blind" message to
>Talisman just to let everyone know that Kwanzaa is coming.
> (By the way, I used to be the only black Baha'i on Talisman, though since
>then there have been a couple of others on and off. How about now? If
>anyone is out there, please send me a private e-mail.)
> Kwanzaa is a new African-American holiday that is beginning to gain
>acceptance in some parts of the black community here. It was started in the
>1970s, I think, in Los Angeles and is supposed to be a celebration of
>African-American culture and community. For the past three or four years, my
>Baha'i community has sponsored an "Interracial Celebration of Kwanzaa" which
>has been very successful in attracting attention and seekers.
> Since one of the themes of Kwanzaa is "umoja" (Swahili for
>unity--meaning, of course, unity of family, community, and race . . . which
>we extend just slightly to the unity of all humanity) our Kwanzaa celebration
>is dedicated to unity and fits very nicely with Baha'i themes. This year I
>am going to try the idea of responsive readings--using some Baha'i quotations
>on unity in a call and response format with the audience. It can be very
>effective.
> Anyway, as some of you know, I think that the Baha'is in the United
>States should start observing this new holiday in our own way and simply
>capture it for our own--as a celebration of interracial unity and a salute to
>black culture. The time is quite ripe. And while such a strategy would
>infuriate black nationalists--which is OK with me--it would do a lot to place
>us in the mainstream of African-American life in this country. I think it
>would go over big.
> Anyway, I will let you know how the celebration turns out. We will hold
>ours on January 1, when Kwanzaa is officially over (it runs between Christmas
>and New Years) but when everyone can come.
>
>Warmest,
>Tony
>
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 13:10:28 -0800
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: margreet@margreet.seanet.com (Marguerite K. Gipson)
Subject: This and that!
Excuse me, but I am going to ramble for a second... I hope you get the point...
Several years ago I remember an interview for a job as a hair designer. I
really wanted this job. I was asked the question about long hair. And if I
was capable of working with long hair... like past the waist type. I said
yes I was quite capable as I had learned from a Master Designer. Secret:
when someone says they do not *like* something, it really means they have
not tried it, attemped to do it, eat it, work with it. whatever...(trying
things on the body like drugs, alcohol, inhalants does not apply here) {my
point!} I learned that from this Master Designer about this secret.... and
I have applied it to life too. And one more thing, I was told as a young
kid, that if you did not understand something, you kept quiet. Unless to ask
questions, to learn more...
So, when someone does not like say Shoghi Effendi's writings, I feel, they
have not really delved into it very deeply, nor have they opened up the
brain to let it soak in. It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure
it all out.
I took a technical English class last winter in college, and one of the
assignment was to write a report, 10 pages, on our favorite author. There
were several criteria for this, in that it had to be convincing. Enough so,
that someone who never heard of the author would want to read it. I choose
Shoghi Effendi and his book, God Passes By. I wrote about the method in
which he wrote, the mysteries it will uncover for the future and what it
fortold of the future, that back in 1944 had not come to pass, but by 1994
it had. I got an *A* for the paper. I gave the book to my instructor.
Even though, she did not grasp the spiritual meanings, she felt it was a
fine, well written, too wordy by todays standards, historical piece of
work.
Warmly, Margreet
PS, no longer a hair designer. But now I design computer configuration,
systems, and software/hardward purchases for either the home user or
businesses.
=END=
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 10:32:37 +1300 (NZDT)
To: "K. Paul Johnson" , talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: Re: Rhetorical excess
Dear K. Paul,
Re:
>
>One recent example of extreme rhetoric is Robert's
>denunciations of various Talismanians.
Your whole letter reeks of "ad hominem" (which I am used to that by now,
here) but, really, it seems you have provided a fine instance of the kind
of discursive failings which you attribute to me. Oh dear: I do wish the
contributions here could be more psychologically insightful and subtle.
And just. Not to forget factual.
As you have not committed yourself to the Baha'i Faith, I do not wish to
make any comment at all on what you said about Baha'u'llah and
'Abdu'l-Baha...
Robert
=END=
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 11:45:43 +1300 (NZDT)
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: learned in Baha..
Talismans,
There are -- as is well-known -- more ways than one of skinning a cat. In
this letter, I continue the discussion of the learned in Baha but
consciously try to refrain from making a move which will incite more
paranoia on the part of those who have accused me of elitism and
anti-intellectuality, and so on.
I looked up "Learned" in the Aqdas and was directed to section 163. To
understand section 163, I referred back to sections 161 and 162 which talk
about the need for recognition of God and compliance with His law. As I
read, I noted that first and foremost they (the Learned in Baha) are
compliant with God's law. They do not "hesitate, though it be for less than
a moment," in this compliance (KI 162). On this basis Baha'u'llah -- it
seems -- distinguishes between two kinds of spiritual condition -- that of
the learned in Baha, and that of the rest of humanity:
"Whoso hath not recognized this sublime and fundamental verity, and hath
failed to attain this most exalted station, the winds of doubt will agitate
him, and the sayings of the infidels will distract his soul. He that hath
acknowledged this principle will be endowed with the most perfect
constancy. All honour to this all-glorious station, the remembrance of
which adorneth every exalted Tablet. Such is the teaching which Goth
bestoweth on you, a teaching which will deliver you from all manner of
doubt and perplexity, and enable you to attain unto salvation in both this
world and the next..." KI 163.
In this passage the Learned in Baha are seen to be possessed of certitude.
Certitude, said the estimable Fadl, is the fairest fruit of Faith.
Descartes attained to such a level of certitude that he felt the workings
of a merciful and non-deceiving God in both his inner and outer senses.
This was after he was well and truly through with his immature period of
extreme scepticism which certain modern schools have taken as the guiding
light of scholarship (Cartesian doubt).
The Writings (see the above passage, even) provide evidence that certitude,
though it stems from Faith, penetrates all aspects of a person's life,
including material and scientific. Thus, one of the learned in Baha,
should s/he turn to scholarship or commerce might be expected to produce
outstanding results -- regardless of the opinions of contemporaries etc.
I hope that it is accepted that I am not writing this promote division or
to make some kind of preposterous statement about my own station... I am
one of those people who seems to have accepted the Covenant like water
embracing blotting paper, so I have real trouble with understanding someone
who is not so simple... But this does not mean that I am
anti-intellectual, or fascist, or conservative, or repressive... I work in
an intellectual envionment, promoting education.. I am particularly
interested in women's issues... I serve on no assembly, am not and never
have been a member of the Institution of the Learned... I am just a
simple and ordinary Baha'i who likes to apply logical thought to matters..
Robert.
=END=
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 18:54:04 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Seeping energy and destiny
Dear friends ,
Being the resident American triumphalist in the group :) I can hardly
let Ahangs challenge go unanswered .
I am not sure if Ahang is suggesting that the Guardians writings should
be "contextualized" and there historicaly conditioned truth taken into
account when assessing there continued validity ? If so I am sure he is
willing to folllow the implications through the full range of the Guardians
work and not simply his work relating to the Spiritual Destiny of America .
It seems to me the Guardians comments on America need to be located as an
elucidation of Abdul Baha 's remarks which in turn are an elucidation of
Bahau llah's vision, contained in the letters to the Kings, of what the world
needed to look like in order to be in harmony with the evolving structure of
*reality*. Shoghi Effendi usually refers to Abdul Baha when he is
commenting on the "Destiny" issue . For instance the famous " it will lead
all nations spiritually" comment of the Master . I have commented on this
before in my defense of America posts . I for one am not ready to toss aside
Abdul Baha's perception of America and its role in the world .
Abdul Baha's comments and therefore the Guardians begin to make sense
when combined with Baha u llah's chanpioning of consultative democracy and
political and religious liberty. The spiritual destiny of North America ,
its leading all nations spiritually is intimately connected, in my view, to
the development on this continent of religious and political liberty which
Abdul Baha links with growth and development in human affairs.
It is the promulgation of this *Liberty* which is at the heart of America's
spiritual destiny. As i have commented before it was Jefferson that the
Chinese students quoted in Tiananmen Square in 1989 .That role and destiny is
anything but over . The sheer fact that a significant percentage of the
American Baha i community is now comprised of Persian believers is itself
testimony to the fact that America's role in the world is anything but ended
.
Religious and political liberty was not,at the time Abdul Baha and
Shoghi Effendi spoke, and is not currently the lot of the majority of
humanity. Until it is any pronouncements that the "mission" of America and
its "destiny"as being finished is a bit pre-mature.
Shoghi Effendi , I believe, understood as Guardian , what Abdul Baha was
saying and expounded upon it in a manner that would , hopefully , be
meaningful to and galvanize the American Bahai's to continue the drama begun
with the Dawmbreakers as Jim pointed out .I dont think the Guardians remarks
were meant to apply only to the American Baha i community . He is careful to
distinguish comments directed to the Bahai community internally and those
comments meant to describe the role of the nation . As he was expounding upon
Abdul Baha with respect to it "will lead all nations spiritually" clearly a
reference to the American nation , the Guadians elucidations about the role
of America and the Bahai community must be set in that context. Shoghi
Effendi is attempting to explain that *if* this mision is to be successful
America and Bahais must recognize the spiritual foundation of all enduring
human progress . That progress is grounded inTherophany in this case the
Thepohany that is the Glory of God .see opening pages of Promised Day is
Come. Hence I argue the Guardian is expouding upon a Theophanocracy not a
Theocracy. And that America because it was the first nation to experience
disestablishment of religion had a leading role to play in ending the rule of
"defenders of religious orthodoxy"promoting political and religious liberty
BUT this role and promise which contains with it a great responsibility to
act was dependent on grounding this in Theophany. One only needs to consider
the silliness , in my view , of Richard Rorty's "cheerful nihilism" as a
basis for enduring human values to appreciate the Guardians comments and
concerns. Without a spiritual foundation for human values grounded in
Theophany we end up with Rorty's "cheerful nihilism"as the basis for
reflection and choice(Reason ) ; those qualities grounded in the Divine Names
Light and Love. Rorty is supposed to be for those not familiar with him
one of the leading American philosophers of the late 20th century .( I am
more inclined to think he falls under the category mentioned by Abdul Baha in
Paris Talks of those who pay homage to her highness the cow .)
Kevin : It is heartwarming to know we are standing shoulder to shoulder;
if not eye to eye it is because I am probably looking through the wrong part
of my bi- focals . :)
Having as one of my avocations a student of Jefferson I must come to the
defense of my friend . Jefferson was more influenced by the Scottish
moralists than Locke . I would also say that he was not, unlike Locke, a
materialist . Jefferson grounded his belief in humanities capacity for
republican government on the exisrence of the "moral sense" which he argued
was common to all human beings , including slaves . Though as we know he
never quite transcended his cultural baggage on that one . I might add he did
sruggle with it and predicted the anger ,resentment and suspicion affecting
race in this county but I digress.
It is the existence of this moral sense, Jefferson argues, which is the
basis for human equality not gifts or talents which obviously varied . This
moral sense is grounded in our very being by an all wise Creator - the imago
dei . Jefferson's re-working of Lockes trilogy of Life , Liberty and
Property is quite deliberate . His substitution of property for happiness is
quite significant . It is a theme which apears throughout his writing in
general and correspondence with John Adams and especially James Madison. I
might add he and Madison disagred about a number of things not the least of
which was the notion of the inviolability of property .. Property for
Jefferson was a means to a larger end which was political and religious
liberty . The heart of this liberty were what Bahau llah would later call
the "cultural attainments of the mind . Universal propety ownership ,
political and religious liberty were the basis on which all humans could
participate in community governance and develope the unique talents with
which they were endowwed by a loving Creator. This sets him apart not only
from Locke but also his compatriotes most notably Madison .
it is important , I think , to understand Jefferson's use of "pursuit of
happines " rather than property and what he meant by "happiness." Madison was
a closet Lockian , Hamilton was clearly one . Alas for all of us it is
Hamilton's vision of America which has triumphed not Jeffersons . It is
probably safe to say Jefferson is closer to Aristotle than Locke in that he
agreed that humans are fundamentally "homo civicus" rather than "homo
oeconomicus". Also like Aristotle he saw the highest end of life in
contemplation. What is profoundly radical about Jefferson is his extension of
this capacity to all human beings. Property was to seve this end that every
human was to have the liberty -political and religious- the basis for
economic security that none wpould be subject to the tryanny of another or of
what we today might call the tyranny of the marketplace . It is in so
arranging the affairs of life that each person might find " happiness" which
was in the contemplations of the mind and the 'workings " of the Creator in
nature .
The materialist version of America and of the "empire " nation is the
work of Hamilton . I would contend that Shoghi Effendi's call to the Bahais
and by extension to the American people was a call to re-capture the
Jeffersonian vision and undergird it with the powerful sense of Theophany
which it lacked. It is only Theophany which can sustain Jeffersons vision
in the face of all the challenges to it . This country lacks a well develped
Theophanic tradition. American Bahais not much understanding Theophany and
not much understanding Jefferson ended up trying to create community out of
Administration . So my argument is marry Jefferson to the theophanic irfan
of Ibn Arabi and what you get plus some more is Baha u llah . Jefereson gives
us the *liberty* to make meaningful to each person what Ibn Arabi would
understand about the prologmena to SV. Baha u llah puts then together and
says here it is folks " . .to the end that every man may testify, in
himself, by himself , in the station of the Manifestation of his Lord, that
verily there is no God save Him."
Jefferson would like that one . Sounds kind of like a radical
spiritual democracy to me or an Irfan Republic .
warm regards,
Terry
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 17:21:17 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Christopher Buck
Cc: Alethinos@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: America's Spritual Destiny
On Wed, 27 Dec 1995, Christopher Buck wrote:
> (2) Finally, are not Native Americans and Native Canadians integral
> to America's spiritual destiny?
I think the Master refers, in His Tablets of the Divine Plan, to the
indigenous peoples of America. Since these Tablets were addressed to the
USA and Canada, obviously both countries are included as the recipients
of this mission and this responsibility.
I have heard it pointed out that there are a whole lot of Mexican Indians
who are also indigenous peoples of North America.
Brent
P.S. Chris, I've finally gotten to the last chapter of "Symbol and
Secret" -- it's the best part of the book.
Brent
=END=
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 13:29:10 +1200
To: TLCULHANE@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: Re: Seeping energy and destiny
Talismans,
Today I have with me Richard Rorty's "Essays on Heidegger and Others", so
it was interesting to read Terry's comments on him... Terry wrote:
One only needs to consider
>the silliness , in my view , of Richard Rorty's "cheerful nihilism" as a
>basis for enduring human values to appreciate the Guardians comments and
>concerns. Without a spiritual foundation for human values grounded in
>Theophany we end up with Rorty's "cheerful nihilism"as the basis for
>reflection and choice(Reason ) ; those qualities grounded in the Divine Names
>Light and Love. Rorty is supposed to be for those not familiar with him
>one of the leading American philosophers of the late 20th century .( I am
>more inclined to think he falls under the category mentioned by Abdul Baha in
>Paris Talks of those who pay homage to her highness the cow .)
>
Rorty is a pretty good scholar and writer, I think, and does recognise our
movement from one cultural paradigm to another. Where is the "cheerful
nihilism" expression from, Terry? Rorty is known as a pragmatist (and not
an advocate of certitude!) and as such he is open to possibilities... Of
course he is a very small fish in the overall scheme of things, but is
quite influential in postmodern thought.. . I am using him in the my
opening part of my thesis... His reference to Comte, Heidegger and
pragmatism, to be precise...
Robert.
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 18:42:52 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: Re: Rhetorical excess
O.K. I'll keep playing too.
On Wed, 27 Dec 1995, K. Paul Johnson wrote:
> According to Saman Ahmadi:
> >
> > O.K. Can you give me some examples of these permeations?
> Death to America! Death to America!(repeat a zillion times)
> Since you yourself have said that some people here have been
> victimized by Iranian fanaticism and violence, I don't see why
> I should have the burden of proof that such a thing exists.
> > >
Just one post ago you said that it was not your television
that gave you the view of Iran.
You are mixing up alot of things: in a totalitarian
system, when you are hungry, when you feel victmized by
the past, you will say anything.
If violence permeated the Iranian culture, you would have
seen mobs killing Baha'is and looting their homes - it
did not happen this time around.
The is also some history behind the rhetoric of
"Death to America" [and I suggest it is a reference to the government
more than the people] - from WWW II to 1953 and Dr. Mossadegh,
to Muhammad Reza Shah.
> >
> > You have set up yourself as an observer - I was alluding to
> > the fact that you did not object when others have been
> > excessive in their speech.
> There is a HUGE difference between negative characterizations
> of a trend of thought, or an attitude, and personal attacks.
> Robert engaged in the latter, repeatedly. Yet I did not object
> while he was doing it. In the aftermath of the dustup, I
> offered a hypothesis about why *Baha'is engage in abusive
> language with one another more than any other religious group
> with which I'm familiar*. Since I'm familiar with Methodists,
> Mormons, Quakers, Unitarians, Theosophists, A.R.E., Eckankar,
> and Fourth Way, that's saying something. If it's not noise
> from the Iranian cultural context, what is it?
> >
It is just noise.
[some deletions]
> > I am sure you know how Azal treated Baha'u'llah.
> Not really.
Well, I suggest you find out more about the story.
> Do you think
> > that Baha'u'lla's deeds and words were excessive in regard to
> > his half-brother?
> Don't know. But that's rather culturally relative, isn't it?
Exactly - you said that the Iranian culture did not provide
Baha'u'llah with means to express His ideas in a less strict
way - look at what happened and how Baha'u'llah reacted.
> What might be a mild reproof for an Italian might strike a Dane
> as outrageously aggressive and rude. My point was that the
> high-volume denunciations in Baha'i literature should be seen
> in cultural context, and not used to justify non-Iranian
> Baha'is ranting and raving in the same way and feeling holy
> about it.
> > > world and why. And to share some insights which may inspire
> > > further discussion.
> > >
> >
> > I am not inspired.
> But you're discussing, so you must be.
>
Inspire has a positive connotation - I would say that I
am filling up the bandwidth uselessly.
sAmAn
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 17:54:38 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: "K. Paul Johnson"
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Proper way of responding to Covenant-breaker postings
On Wed, 27 Dec 1995, K. Paul Johnson wrote:
> [...]
> I think, in choosing how to react to circumstances (such as
> Michelle's last name) or ideas, Baha'is might do well to ask
> themselves: am I unconsciously adopting a nineteenth-century
> Iranian tone of rhetorical excess, because I've mistakenly
> assumed that it's a divine quality rather than a human
> accident?
First, I did not simply respond to Michelle's last name, as she thought.
She posted to soc.religion.bahai some months ago. In it she posted
comments on the possibility of another Manifestation of God being on the
earth at the present time, and referred to a passage in the Gleanings
which she felt supported this possibility.
My radar went up when I read this posting on s.r.b. a while back. I had
only recently learned who Jamshid Ma'ani was, and did note at that time
that Michelle had the same last name. It was not her name, but the
content and spirit of her posting which attracted my attention. I asked
her if she was related to Jamshid Ma'ani, and I think I asked her if she
was a follower. (I am looking for our original postings, but cannot
easily find them among the 15 or so disks of my copies of e-mail since
1993.) Anyway, my recollection is that she denied being a family member,
but did not explicitly deny being a follower; certainly nothing as
explicit as in her recent response to me which was posted to Talisman.
She also did not come *anywhere* near dismissing Jamshid Ma'ani's claims
as preposterous, but seemed to find them plausible. Nothing about how
nobody but a fool would continue following Jamshid Ma'ani.
Anyway, at that time on s.r.b. she did not come across as a person who
felt she might be misguided, or have some legitimate questions. She came
across -- and I acknowledge the possibility that it might be my
perspective, as much what was inherent in her messages -- as someone out
to foment trouble. I believed her to be a sympathizer of Jamshid Ma'ani
who would not openly declare her intentions. I forwarded the messages to
the NSA, which determined that she was not a declared Covenant-breaker.
That is, she had never been an enrolled Baha'i, and only enrolled Baha'is,
who are parties to the Covenant, can break that Covenant. The possibility
that she was a family member, and a follower of Covenant-breakers,
remained open. I did not hear from her again until last week, and did not
remember her name until after I first replied.
Then when she posted last week, again this did not seem to me to be simply
inquiry. Obviously, Baha'is themselves have asked the institutions about
the authority of the House of Justice to receive and disburse the
Huququ'llah, an issue that the House felt important enough to mention in
the body of its Constitution, as well as in a question-and-answer format
which was reproduced in The American Baha'i about three years ago. But
the tone of her posting did not strike me as somebody with a question, as
much as somebody with an ulterior motive.
Now, I have never read anyplace what the proper protocol is for a Baha'i
who encounters a person who is enunciating a Covenant-breaker line. That
is, other than complete avoidance. There is no protocol, no example in
Baha'i literature, no support in the Text whatever, for a Baha'i to
determine for himself or herself if the person with whom he is speaking is
a Covenant-breaker. It's quite a dilemma. On the one hand, you don't
want to jump to conclusions; on the other, you don't want to toy with
something that is way over your head, about which the most emphatic
warnings have issued to not touch it.
I felt that I had enough information, from the earlier posts, as well as
the more recent one, to determine Mrs. Michelle Ma'ani's intentions, and
to assert that I felt she was an active follower of a Covenant-breaker. I
did not believe her purpose to be simple inquiry. Perhaps it was.
Perhaps I should have been more courteous at first. As I said before, and
in a private post sent jointly to her and to Counsellor Birkland, I will
apologize and seek to make amends if, when all is known, I was wrong. It
is possible that I turned away a seeking soul. But I still think it is
quite possible that her intentions, (or perhaps those of her husband, who
is the source of these challenges) are suspect. This is not something
with which I have a lot of experience. Nor do I expect to seize the next
opportunity to engage in a lengthy dialogue with a similar person, to
determine their attitude towards the House, etc. Mrs. Ma'ani's
statements challenging the integrity and the authority of the House were
-- taking into consideration my earlier contact with her -- of the most
serious nature. It would have been great if Steve Birkland was around,
because the most appropriate thing was to refer her to him. Steve's
answering machine says that he is on the road, and will not be receiving
his messages until January 9th.
In this discussion, I do not want to lose sight of another important
principle. I know of no text to support the view that I should engage in
dialogue with a person who believes and wants to discuss Covenant-breaker
views. Mrs. Michelle Ma'ani, if her intention was to determine the views
of Baha'is concerning challenges raised by her relative who is a
Covenant-breaker, might have approached the subject with some sensitivity
for how Baha'is view these issues. She posed her comments and questions
in a way, and on subjects, that are the most charged topics a Baha'i can
encounter.
I do not shrink from the possibility that I over-reacted, or that I was
spiritually posing, or that I am not equal to the task of appropriately as
an individual protecting the Faith, or that I was profoundly discourteous.
I am not afraid of false criticism, because it doesn't hurt and is
meaningless; and I am not afraid of true criticism, especially if it
*does* hurt, because I draw closer to the truth by learning of my faults.
I just think the jury is still out, on whether I hurt a seeker, or whether
I appropriately raised the need for great caution.
Even for challenges which are decades old, I disagree that there is no
harm in reading them. 'Abdu'l-Baha commented on the efforts of his
brother Muhammad-'Ali to undermine His position, and on Muhammad-'Ali's
illusion that if he succeeded in undermining support for 'Abdu'l-Baha, he
would succeed in transferring that support to himself. The Master as much
as says, he -- Muhammad-'Ali -- may succeed in stopping up the noses of
the believers against the fragrance of the flowers, but he will never
succeed in getting them to want to smell stench.
My point is this: I don't view the Baha'i caution against engaging in
conversations with Covenant-breakers and their followers as a 19th century
outmoded approach, to be superseded by the enlightened view of
multi-modal, highly nuanced, diversified, multiplicity of views on who's
in charge of the Cause of God. Such CB materials and contacts can, I
personally feel, seriously undermine one's implicit trust in the character
and motives of the Head of the Cause, which is the greatest heritage we
have to pass on to the future.
So, perhaps I won't respond the same way in future, but on the other
hand, I won't compromise an imporant principle, and don't want to
dilly-dally while I believe poison is being broadcast.
=END=
From: l.droege@genie.geis.com
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 95 00:39:00 UTC 0000
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: America's Spiritual Destin
OK, Ahang, I'll bite:
{"In the Tablets of the Divine plan... [Abdu'l-Baha] revealed the high
distinction and the glorious work which America, and particularly the
United States and Canada, was to achieve in both the Formative and Golden
Ages of the Baha'i Dispensation." Shoghi Effendi, _Messages to America
1932-1946_, p.91
We're still in the Formative Age, right?{
"As the Plan bequeathed by 'Abdu'l-w3Baha unfolds, through successive decades
of the present century, its measureless potentialities, and gathers within
the field of its operation nation after nation in successive continents of
the globe, it will be increasingly recognized not only as the most potent
agency for the development of the world Administrative System, but also as
a primary factor in the birth and efflorescence of the World O?&der itself
in both the East and the West." _Messages to America 1932-1946_, p.97
Sounds to me like a continuous process. And:
May He, Who through the irresistible operation of the will of His almighty
Father, called this community into being, nursed it in its infancy through
the inestimable benefits conferred by a divinely appointed Covenant,
infused through His personal contact with its members, and the proclamation
of His Own Station, a new spirit into their souls; conferred, subsequently,
through the revelation of His Tablets, the spiritual primacy designed to enable
them to
assume a preponderating role in the propagation of His Father's Faith;
graciously aided them, following His ascension, to inaugurate their
God-given mission by fixing the pattern, creating the institutions, and
vindicating the purpose, of a divinely appointed Administrative Order and
by launching subsequently the preliminary undertakings in their homeland,
as well as in all the republics of Latin America, in anticipation of the
formal inauguration of a systematic World Crusade for the furtherance of
His Father's Cause; and more recently assisted them to embark, in concert
with their brethren in other continents of the globe, upon the first
stage of their world-encompassing mission, and to win a series of victories
unprecedented in the annals of the Faith in their homeland-- May He,
through His watchful care and unfailing grace, continue to sustain them,
individually and collectively, in the course of the remaining stages of
the Plan, and enable them to bring to a triumphant termination the initial
epoch in the unfoldment of the Divine Plan which He has primarily
entrusted to them and on the successful prosecution of which their entire
spiritual destiny must depend." Shoghi Effendi, _Citadel of Faith_, pp.157-158
This was written during the Ten-Year Crusade, which apparently is in the
_first_ part of the unfoldment of the Divine Plan. So we weren't done
fulfilling the "Formative{ Age" part of the plan in Shoghi Effendi's
lifetime. Are we done now? Well,
"Now strive ye that the Collective Center of the sacred religions-- for the
inculcation of which all the Prophets were manifested and which is no
other than the spirit of the Divine Teachings-- be spread in all parts of
America, so that each one of you may shine forth from the horizon of
Reality like unto the morning star, divine illumination may overcome the
darkness of nature, and the world of humanity may become enlightened. This
is the most great work! Should you become confirmed therein, this world
will become another world, the surface of the earth will become the
delectable Paradise, and eternal Institutions be founded." 'Abdu'l-Baha,
_Tablets of the Divine Plan_, p.97
Everyone out there feeling enlightened yet? Paul (asking an objective
observer ), does it look like Paradise to you?
Seriously, I think we've made a start, but I think there's still a lot
left to do. And wasn't there a message not long ago from the UHJ (can't
find it just now) indicating that we might be blowing it? It didn't
sound like they thought we'd fulfilled our purpose.
Well, enough for now,
Leigh
=END=
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 14:07:37 +1200
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
Subject: Outrage..PS
A PS to this thread...
I note that before Xmas I said I was going to quit Talisman. I have never
claimed to be ALL THAT consistent, and because of this I try to not form my
impression of anyone's character entirely from my observation of their
worst moments. My frailty makes me a kinder human being...
Robert,
=END=
---------------------------------------------------------------
[here I've deleted 300+ posts, all from "faust@eznet.com", who appears
to have accidentally forwarded about a week's worth of his/her email
to the Talisman list]
---------------------------------------------------------------
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 20:10:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Destiny fulfilled!
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
OK guys, we're having fun now. Remember I'm playing the role of
devil's advocate, so let's have some fun.
What I'm going to do is to list the quotes that brother Leigh
provided and see where it takes us.
> "In the Tablets of the Divine plan... [Abdu'l-Baha] revealed
> the high distinction and the glorious work which America, and
> particularly the United States and Canada, was to achieve in
> both the Formative and Golden Ages of the Baha'i Dispensation."
> Shoghi Effendi, _Messages to America 1932-1946_, p.91
> We're still in the Formative Age, right?
Well, yes we're in the Formative Age, but my argument was that
the spiritual destiny of the America was fulfilled by 1963, the
end of the Ten Year Crusade. I believe that 1937 to 1963 is the
period which this destiny was fulfilled -- that entire period is
in the Formative Age.
As for the Golden Age, I also recognized in my earlier post that
the American nation will have a role to play in bringing about
the Most Great Peace which will happen during the Golden Age, and
I said that's 6-7 centuries down the road. But from 1963 till
that time, well, let's read a bit more ...
> "As the Plan bequeathed by 'Abdu'l-Baha unfolds, through
> successive decades of the present century, its measureless
> potentialities, and gathers within the field of its operation
> nation after nation in successive continents of the globe, it
> will be increasingly recognized not only as the most potent
> agency for the development of the world Administrative System,
> but also as a primary factor in the birth and efflorescence of
> the World Order itself in both the East and the West."
> _Messages to America 1932-1946_, p.97
> Sounds to me like a continuous process.
I'm sorry Leigh, but this quote has nothing to do with the
*America's* spiritual destiny. It has to do with the rise of the
Administrative Order as the child of the Divine Plan which
belongs to the entire world and not just America. (I'll trust
you'll correct me if I'm wrong...)
Then we have the following long, but wonderful quote which
actually plays right into the my trap ... "I love it when a plan
comes together." [c. The A Team]
> May He, Who through the irresistible operation of the will of
> His almighty Father, called this community into being, nursed
> it in its infancy through the inestimable benefits conferred by
> a divinely appointed Covenant, infused through His personal
> contact with its members, and the proclamation of His Own
> Station, a new spirit into their souls; conferred,
> subsequently, through the revelation of His Tablets, the
> spiritual primacy designed to enable them to assume a
> preponderating role in the propagation of His Father's Faith;
> graciously aided them, following His ascension, to inaugurate
> their God-given mission by fixing the pattern, creating the
> institutions, and vindicating the purpose, of a divinely
> appointed Administrative Order and by launching subsequently
> the preliminary undertakings in their homeland, as well as in
> all the republics of Latin America, in anticipation of the
> formal inauguration of a systematic World Crusade for the
> furtherance of His Father's Cause; and more recently assisted
> them to embark, in concert with their brethren in other
> continents of the globe, upon the first stage of their
> world-encompassing mission, and to win a series of victories
> unprecedented in the annals of the Faith in their homeland--
> May He, through His watchful care and unfailing grace, continue
> to sustain them, individually and collectively, in the course
> of the remaining stages of the Plan, and enable them to bring
> to a triumphant termination the initial epoch in the unfoldment
> of the Divine Plan which He has primarily entrusted to them and
> on the successful prosecution of which their entire spiritual
> destiny must depend." Shoghi Effendi, _Citadel of Faith_,
> pp.157-158
> This was written during the Ten-Year Crusade, which apparently
> is in the _first_ part of the unfoldment of the Divine Plan. So
> we weren't done fulfilling the "Formative Age" part of the plan
> in Shoghi Effendi's lifetime. Are we done now?
Yes, we are done. The quote from the Citadel of Faith is about
our spiritual destiny through the first epoch (and that's the key
word!) of the Tablets of the Divine Plan. The first epoch of the
Tablet of the Divine Plan was completed by Ridvan 1963. See the
first letter of the Universal House of Justice in their
collection of 1963-68 letters.
So, once again that entire quotation is about what the American
Baha'is must do until Ridvan 1963. Not a word or hind beyond
that.
But then Leigh shares this wonderful quote, one of my favorites:
> "Now strive ye that the Collective Center of the sacred
> religions -- for the inculcation of which all the Prophets were
> manifested and which is no other than the spirit of the Divine
> Teachings-- be spread in all parts of America, so that each one
> of you may shine forth from the horizon of Reality like unto
> the morning star, divine illumination may overcome the darkness
> of nature, and the world of humanity may become enlightened.
> This is the most great work! Should you become confirmed
> therein, this world will become another world, the surface of
> the earth will become the delectable Paradise, and eternal
> Institutions be founded." 'Abdu'l-Baha, _Tablets of the Divine
> Plan_, p.97
Actually, this paragraph is very the goals of the first Seven
Year Plan, 1937-1944, which is to open every Republic in Central
and South America and also every state in North America. It long
accomplished.
So, once again, I state my theory that America's spiritual
destiny was fulfilled by Ridvan 1963.
There is a second component to her destiny, but it doesn't come
around until the Golden Age which is a long, long time away.
If you can prove me wrong, more power to your elbow. I would
love nothing more. But you quote your chapter and verse, as our
dear Leigh has.
Terry jan, I read your post with a great deal of interest, but
its far too complicated for my peasant mind. Brother keep in
mind that I'm not one of those fancy professors, I'm just a
humble pile of dust. So, I ask, can you stick to the Writings of
the Faith to form the basis of your argument? All these other
people, either I don't know them or it doesn't do anything for
me. Only the Writings of the Cause, please.
OK, guys, back to the drawing board. Do your homework and try to
knock me off the hill ;-}
love, ahang.
=END=
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 21:07:01 -0500
From: "Ahang Rabbani"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: America's Spiritual Destiny
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Our dear Chris Buck, who saw my trap from a mile away (actually
nearly 1800 miles away, but who's counting ...), wrote:
> (1) In *Messages to America*, the beloved Guardian states that
> the Baha'is of America (or the world) may actually *hasten* the
> Lesser Peace.
> Never have I seen a communication from an NSA or Haifa that has
> enlarged on this overlooked statement. (This is not
> institution-bashing, but merely an observation.)
> I'm sure you'll agree that this statement by the Guardian has
> implications of world-historical proportions.
This one quote my torpedo my entire theory about spiritual
destiny of America being already fulfilled. But I won't go down
easy ;-} So, can you provide exact citation so I can read the
context of the Guardian's statement?
This statement by the way will go against the statements of the
House which says that the lesser peace will not come about
because of the efforts of the Baha'i community (my summary), see
for example the letter of the House where they discuss the
Major/Minor Plans of God.
Anyway, chapter and verse please.
much love, ahang.
=END=
From: Alethinos@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 23:34:20 -0500
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Ice balls and such . . . (America)
Dear Mr. Taylor:
I had wondered how long it would take you to step in. As usual I am cheered
by your concern, your playfully tussling my hair, giving me a kind pat on the
cheek with your cattle prod and that humorless wink in your eye! Gotta love
it.
It is wonderful that you have again decided to speak for the entire list.
I do indeed remember your posts - all of them. I still have most. As I recall
you began (along with Sen - I expect he'll arrive shortly) by casting grave
doubts on the concept of axiology for a host of reasons. I attempted to
answer all of them - from as many angles as possible. No matter how I
presented it you rejected the concept. You cast a wonderful assortment of
aspersions on not only the credibility of the idea (which was simply one
element of the whole issue of America's spiritual destiny) but suggested that
I was nothing more than an ignorant buffoon ranting and raving (my rants get
raves you know . . .)
I do remember your post in which you felt you had, in one blow smashed
every point I had brought up regarding this subject, esp. axiology. I read it
carefully and I did find numerous points where we agreed on things. I also
could tell you put some serious work into it. Your central contention that
the main issue of decadency and its being linked to turning away from
legitimate authority is partially correct I felt, and I stated that, I do
believe. I also said that this was one element of a larger picture. I also
suggested in a number of posts that this *decadence* which seemed to be the
thing you felt I was stressing (which I wasn't) was itself simply a symptom
of a wider disease in the West.
Your reference to axiology as a metaphor in this latest post would suggest
that you still do not or perhaps refuse to understand the concept. It is not
a metaphor. It is more a strong theory - a working model if you will.
When Sen continued the attack - again suggesting I perhaps had the IQ of a
Chia Pet I simply sent to the list a bibliography of the works I had studied
on the subject - approx. sixty works. I also offered that way back when I was
doing this work for my M.A. none of the profs. I had review it (including
history and philosophy) objected in general to the concept of axiology - some
had technical issues with it - but no one rejected it out-of-hand.
I spent a better part of a month and dozens of posts going over this idea
- just one element, as I have stated, of this whole issue. No matter how I
presented it you found vague reasons to reject it with little or no
counter-arguments of substance. I forwarded that biblio and said "Ok, here,
you read this stuff, follow the general course of the concept as I have tried
to lay it out here, and show me where I am wrong."
Well Mr Taylor, did you read the works? I read your one substantive
response. The only thing I really disagreed with is the conclusion that all
of the Guardian's *problems* with the West could simply boil down to an point
you claimed.
I did not distort anything you wrote. No matter how I tried to rephrase
your points to see if I had understood them it never pleased you. You would
simply claim I did not understand and post them again. You were not trying to
enlighten me; you were taking great pleasure in telling me I was an idiot. As
you are now.
Indeed Mr. Taylor, it is you who are condescending, disrespectful and
hateful. Anyone who reads your most recent post with one eye closed would see
this. And frankly I am at a lost to understand why. As I stated long ago - if
you just can't accept this one concept on axiology fine. Let it sit off to
the side for now. The central issue is America's spiritual destiny.
If you feel America _does_ have such a destiny let us see your posts on
it. We can agree to disagree on various points. If you feel the opposite -
lets see your arguments.
If you want to continue to hurl ice balls at me go ahead. I don't bruise
easily.
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
=END=
From: belove@sover.net
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 15:15:12 PST
Subject: RE: Indeed assess/seeping energies
To: TLCULHANE@aol.com, 748-9178@mcimail.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Applause applause for this wonderful posting of Terry's. And some
comments.
1. Being Persian-ly challanged, I need to hear again what is Irfan.
2. These ideas deserve being presented in a more organized form. This
is worth writing up.
3. Re: the excerpt below -- A similar phenomena occurs in the Gospels
and is, I've always believed, the roots of Christian anti-semitism.
First the quote, then the parellels.
On Tue, 26 Dec 1995 18:22:34 -0500 TLCULHANE@aol.com wrote:
>
> I find it fascinating that in the quote from _Citadel of Faith
_ which
>Jim mentions the Guardian links the " defenders of religious
orthodoxy "
>from without with "nefarious elements" from within the community as
>challenges that undermine the community . I would like to suggest
that the
>"nefarious elements" the Guardian is refering to here - if we
carefully read
>this passage - are the " traditional defenders of religious
orthodoxy "
>within the community. Traditional religious orthodoxy - those who
oppressed
>and tyrannized the Bab and Babis , Baha u llah and Abdul Baha were
>religiously orthodox . That is they were people who focused on the
>preservation of the EXOTERIC or outer forms of a Faith as the
reason for a
>faith community . They demanded absolute obediance and constantly
talked
>about obediance , they were the ones who divided believers into the
saved ,
>the suspect and the damned. They were and are , I would suggest ,
the ones
>who do not want to face the radical nature of the *Irfan * of the
Babis ; the
>Dawnbreakers of whom we are in the Guardians vision to be the
spiritual
>descendents of . I believe that Shoghi Effendi understood this
perfectly
The story of Jesus involves his being brought before the Sanhedren
and from that body being condemned. It had been held through out the
years of Christian hegenomy that therefore the Jews were to be
punished.
I've always thought that Christ's appearance before the Sanhedrin was
a vital and central element to the story. But I've always interpreted
the Sanhedrin as a symbol of any religious orthodoxy. And especially
a symbol of those who saw it as a symbol of Jewish orthodoxy.
What an amazing ethical dilemma this presents us. How can we be in
submission to a call to orthodoxy and at the same time avoid becoming
a "traditional defender of religious orthodoxy."
How many times has this challenge been given a group?
Our claim is that Baha'ullah's revelation was an advance on previous
revelations, And, as much as I can understand it, it is in this
particular issue that the advance has occured. And it is this
particular issue we struggle to actualize.
And (to return to my own particular sermon) -- how we handle the
diversity amongst ourselves is the first test of that issue.
Love
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 12/27/95
Time: 15:15:12
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
=END=
From: belove@sover.net
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 95 00:16:07 PST
Subject: Out damned faust
To: talisman@indiana.edu
What on earth is going on? !!!
I have over 335 messages from faust@eznet.com.... all through
Talisman. All reading like old Talisman messages.
I don't want this flooding.
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 12/28/95
Time: 00:16:07
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
=END=
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 01:11:54 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonah Winters
To: talisman
Subject: faust?
Can anyone explain this? It was no problem to delete all 400 messages,
but a bit tiresome...??? I fingered faust@eznet.com, but without luck.
Dazzed and puzzled, -Jonah
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jonah and Kari Winters
33 Endean Avenue / Toronto, Ontario / M4M-1W5 / (416) 461-3527
=END=
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 95 19:21 GMT+1300
To: talisman@indiana.edu
From: Alison & Steve Marshall
Subject: The Iqan and "back to Baha'u'llah"
I like this "back to Baha'u'llah" idea. There's much that Talismanians
disagree over, so it seems sensible to start at the point where we agree -
we all accept Baha'u'llah - and then go from there. I think there is much to
be said for reminding ourselves of the principles Baha'u'llah established
and emphasised, and to examine how He saw the situations He found Himself
in, and so on. I don't think this means that we forget the interpretations
of 'Abdu'l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi and the House; it means that we keep a hold,
through the decades, of the vision of the Manifestation. And it doesn't have
to be some fundamentalist thing like "back to the Bible". In fact, the whole
idea is to avoid that kind of rigidity. If we keep a hold of the principles
and vision that Baha'u'llah instituted, then we can afford to be flexible.
The reason I bring this up is because I think it's relevant to the Kitab-i
Iqan. I'm in the middle of reading Christopher Buck's book, "Symbol and
Secret". In it, he explains Baha'u'llah's interpretation of the concept of
resurrection, saying that what 'returns' is not the actual in-the-flesh
person, such as Jesus, but the symbol of that person. Baha'u'llah argues
that the divine drama, so to speak, repeats itself each time a manifestation
appears, and that each role in that drama is portrayed by another actor, who
is, in one sense, a 'return' of the ones in previous dispensations.
Now, with the benefit of this knowledge, I think we Baha'is have the
opportunity to get smart here. We know another manifestation is coming,
therefore we know that this divine drama will be re-created by ...yes,
Baha'is! Moreover, looking at the development of previous dispensations
should also put us on the alert that rigidity and stagnation in religions
begins soon after the death of the manifestation.
Taking some specifics: Baha'u'llah says that the stars and moons that are
gonna fall from the heavens are the clergy and the structures of Islam and
Christianity. But what about after they have fallen, will more stars fall? I
was struck by a hadith that Christopher quoted on page 90: "Were a verse to
be revealed concerning a people, and were it to die with their death,
nothing would remain of the Qur'an". In other words, just because the
historical circumstances in which a verse is revealed no longer exist, it
doesn't mean the verse no longer has application.
Looking then beyond our current position in history, if the stars and moons
are people who are responsible for the administration of a religion... what
stars will fall with the next manifestation? How do we square this with an
absolutist interpretation of the infallibility of the House? Other
interesting 'returns' relate to: the role of the masses, they always blindly
follow their leaders; the literal interpretation of scripture; the loss of
the spirit of the message of the manifestation; the imprisoning of the
religion in a strait-jacket of formalised structure and legalism.
I suggest we get smart and consciously work to recognise where we are
falling into the traps clearly pointed out to us by Baha'u'llah. Let's not
play the role of the _blindly_ obedient masses. This is why I believe in the
idea of 'getting back to Baha'u'llah', and ever-applying the spirit of
Baha'u'llah's message to contemporary conditions.
Alison
BTW: It has always been a problem for me that this Day has been described by
Baha'u'llah as being the Day that will not be followed by night, and yet,
were this to be taken as an absolute, there would be no need for another
manifestation.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alison and Steve Marshall
Email: forumbahai@es.co.nz
90 Blacks Road, Opoho, Dunedin/Otepoti, Aotearoa/New Zealand
--------------------------------------------------------------
=END=
From: Stephen Bedingfield
Subject: faust@eznet.com
To: postmaster@eznet.com
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 23:52:26 MST
Attention: eznet.com Postmaster
================================
This evening I received hundreds of emails from an account on your
system through a mailing list: talisman@indiana.edu .
Of course, so did everyone else on the Talisman list.
Then I did a "who" for the majordomo talisman is on and found out that
your account is not even a subscriber.
The emails appear to be quoted texts of various postings to Talisman and
other lists, and seems that this simply dumped a whole
directory through mailx or something to Talisman.
Would you PLEASE REMOVE this user's account until he/she
learns how to use it properly and/or responsibility as the case may be.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Stephen Bedingfield
--
Stephen Bedingfield | "We desire but
Box 115, Cambridge Bay NT X0E 0C0 | the good of the world and
Canada (403) 983-2123 | the happiness of the nations"
email: sbedin@inukshuk.gov.nt.ca | - Baha'u'llah
=END=
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 95 07:22:42 UT
From: "Brian Armstrong"
To: "Talisman-Request"
Cc: "Talisman"
Subject: Unsubscribe.
Allah'u'Abha, O Friends!
It is with deep regret and pangs of anguish that I must now retire my email
glove from Talisman's ochre-rich shores, and become a martyr no more to the
email whims that flood my in-basket with 400 messages in one day, and an
average weight that even the postman would balk at.
It has been, well ... an experience to say the least, in witnessing the many
cries of people, once friends, tear into each other's spirit's the results of
which have caused grown men and women to cry. I wish I could say that I am
ashamed for not having the energy, nay the passion, to parry and thrust my
swords of pain and harsh judgement, but having learned in my previous life
(read this as before I became a Baha'i) that these proud conquests quickly
turn into sad defeats, seeing that those closest to you seem to be the most
distant, I must say that yes, I did grow up!
Please accept this as a request to UNSUBSCRIBE from Talisman, not for the
moment, not for a period of one week or two but forever. I have the pet
blanket of Baha'i Tech and Baha'i Announce to keep me informed of changes in
the Electronic World, I have WWW sites, and the many newsletters and mailings
I receive from my National Centre, and I have my studies. I have the
writings. When those around me seem to be burdened with doubt and confusion
and cannot lift their heads above the murky pools of leprous envy for
another's jibes and synicism, I have the writings.
I have the journeys of mystical and magical Valleys, of high Mountain peaks,
of caves, of cities, towns and villages and the wide open sea, where mention
of God's name is on everyone's lips - not the constant throwback to, yes, the
OLD WORLD!
Are we all forgetting that this is supposed to be the New Age Dawning! We are
supposed to be the Pioneers of Light! It seems that the curse of the
telecommunications era is that is tears people away from communtiy, a bad drug
that radiates its poison on cathode waves, that pollutes our minds with an
never-ending barrage of multimedia muscle.
I will pray for you all, and for me and my wife, our families, our community,
our glorious Baha'i Faith.
May Baha'u'llah Guide You And Bless Your Every Wayward Path,
May God Forgive You, and May His Grace Protect You and Provide You Warmth.
Goodbye, My Friends!
Brian & Zhinoos Armstrong,
In the Rocky Mountains sipping the Spring Water of the Heavens.
=END=
[end of 12/27/95 session]
Return to Talisman Index
Return to Talisman
Translation Page
Baha'i Studies Page
J. Cole Home Page
WebMaster: Juan R.I. Cole
jrcole@umich.edu