Mohan's thoughtful posting refers to Prakash Narayan Mishra's
book on the Kalki avatar and to Jamshed Fozdar's *Maitreya*. By virtue
of their contributions as Baha'i teachers, doubtless these two authors
have contributed much that his valuable to the Baha'i/Hindu and Baha'i/
Buddhist encounters. In the Abha Paradise, as well as on earth, they
will surely quaff from chalices of pure light.

My problem is that, around fourteen years ago, my thinking
underwent a radical shift, in which I "graduated", as it were, from
the *search after proof* to the *search after truth*. This placed me
in the unenviable position of having to question the truth-value
(although not the legitimacy) of published Baha'i works on prophecy.

I underwent this psychological transformation due to several
factors, not the least of which was when I discovered some alleged
inaccuracies, and possible interpretive distortions, in *Kalki Avatar
ki Khoj (Hindi: *In Quest of the Kalki Avatar*) and later in *Buddha
Maitreya-Amitabha Have Appeared*.

Highlights of Mishra's work had circulated as one of those
badly-xeroxed typescripts that contributed so much to my early
deepening as a Baha'i. To make a long story short, I wrote a letter to
India to the editor of the latest critical edition of the *Kalki
Upapuranam* (one of eighteen minor Puranas, a kind of Vaishnavaite
*Book of Revelation*). This particular scholar offered to translate
the entire *Kalki Upapuranam* for me for a mere $100.00 U.S. I was too
poor to take him up on his offer, a source of lifelong regret for me.

The Hindu scholar did agree, at my request, to translate
Mishra's proof-texts from the *Kalki Upapuranam*. I had requested this
for my book which I was working on at the time, *Zoroaster and the
Mystery of the Great Reversal* (a non-Christian-oriented *Thief in the
Night*, which George Ronald took a casual interest in at one time). To
my utter shock and disillusionment, it appeared that Mishra's
translations and interpretations, as with most in the
prophecy-explication genre, did not agree textually, and certainly not
narratively, with the scholarly translations. It appeared to me,
moreover, that Baha'i authors, generally-speaking, exercised
latitudinal poetic licence in the selection, interpretation, and even
distortion of proof-texts.

There was a similar problem for me with the very concept of
*Maitreya-Amitabha*. To put it baldly, there is no such Buddha,
Buddhistically speaking, for the simple reason that *Maitreya* and
*Amitabha* were separate and even competing deities, each with their
own cults. Moreover, I could not accept the general view of prophecy
as represented in Fozdar's book. For example, I was not persuaded that
Habbakuk (sp?) foresaw *steamshovels*.

In 1981, I wrote a paper which ABS rejected again a couple of
years ago, as it had in the past, for publication:
*Was Baha'u'llah Shah Bahram Varjavand
Despite Zoroastrian "Prophecies"?*, in which I showed that most
Zoroastrian apocalypses represented a form of crisis literature, and
that these largely ninth-century compositions employed the literary
device known as *vaticinia ex eventu* (vaticinations or predictions
based on past events).

Thus, Zoroaster is made to say the the *dogs with disshevelled
hair* (the Arabs) would extirpate the fire temples, steal the bread of
Persians and also their women (in that order, as I recall). I
concluded that for Baha'u'llah to *fulfill* Zoroastrian prophecies,
their obvious meaning would have to be negated in favor of a more
egalitarian reading, which the texts did not really support. (I have
letters from Dasturs in Bombay to prove it!)

My point is that these *geneologies* Baha'i endeavor to
establish are methodologically and textually unsound. Furthermore,
such interpretations place even greater constraints on Baha'i universalism.

In my as-yet unpublished *Native Messengers of God in Canada?:
A Test Case for Baha'i Universalism* (a title editorially unacceptable
to Baha'i editors), I make the point that the Baha'i Faith stands in
dangers of ossifying into a nine-religion exclusivism, or something
similar. Instead of believing in just one prophet, many or most
Baha'is believe in nine to fifteen specifically-named prophets, to the
exclusion of other possible candidates, among which is Guru Nanak,
whom the beloved Guardian, evidently, was disinclined to accept even
as a *nabi*, as Mohan ventured.

Creating ersatz geneologies further complicates the problem,
because Buddhists are then obliged to follow Christ, and the Iroquois
are obliged to follow Muhammad. Prophetologically, Baha'i salvation
history then reads like the *Book of Mormon*, in which the Abrahamic
family of religions is seen as normative and every effort is made to
construct primordial and artifical geneologies among them. In this
effort, in the search after proof, the search after truth is
subordinated to missionary mercenary ethics.

But that's my own opinion as a phenomenologist of religion.
Back to fourth-century Syria, to work through that mid-life crisis
known as the proverbial *career change*.

BTW, a Talismanian asked about one of my references to
Muhammad as *Seal of the Messengers*. Here it is: *Glorified art Thou,
O Lord my God! I beseech Thee by Thy Chosen Ones, and by the Bearers
of thy Trust, and by Him Whom Thou hast ordained to be the Seal of Thy
Prophets and of Thy Messengers...* (Baha'i Prayers, p. 74).

Christopher Buck

**********************************************************************
* * * * * *
* * * Christopher Buck Invenire ducere est.
* * * Carleton University * * *
* * * Internet: CBuck@CCS.Carleton.CA * * *
* * * P O Box 77077 * Ottawa, Ontario * K1S 5N2 Canada * * *
* * * * * *
**********************************************************************

To: Paul,Easton,<peaston@worf.uwsp.edu>
Cc: Talisman,<talisman@indiana.edu>
Bcc:
From: LABANOWSKI <slabanow@s-cwis.unomaha.edu>
Subject: Re: Marital Rape
Date: Tuesday, May 9, 1995 12:14:14 EZT
Attach:
Certify: N
Forwarded by:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Paul,

Speaking as one who has personally experienced marital rape, I
believe that the UHJ's letter on sexual abuse (dated January 24,
1993) does include marital rape when it states:

"The use of force by the physically strong against the weak,
as a means of imposing one's will and fulfilling one's desires,
is a flagrant transgression of the Baha'i Teachings. There can
be no justification for anyone compelling another, through the
use of force or through the threat of violence, to do that to
which the other person is not inclined. ...

From the Pen of Baha'u'llah Himself has come the following
statement on the subject of the treatment of women:

The friends of God must be adorned with the ornament
of justice, equity, kindness and love. As they do not
allow themselves to be the object of cruelty and
transgression, in like manner they should not allow
such tyranny to visit the handmaidens of God. He, verily,
speaketh the truth and commandeth that which benefitteth
His servants and handmaidens. He is the Protector of all
in this world and the next. (The letter does not note
where this quote is from ... I will check REFER to see if
I can find it, or if someone knows, please let us know.)

No Baha'i husband should ever beat his wife, or subject her to
any form of cruel treatment; to do so would be an unacceptable
abuse of the marriage relationship and contrary to the Teachings
of Baha'u'llah."

When Terry first read this letter to me over the phone (he knew
how desparately I needed to hear it and didn't want to wait to give
me a copy), I knew that Baha'u'llah and the House were referring
to the treatment which I had been subjected to - marital rape. It
is hard for someone to accept the fact that they have been a victim
of something so awful, but "the use of force ... as a means of
imposing one's will and fulfilling one's desires" in relation to sex
can be called nothing but marital rape.

I need to get my son to bed, so I am going to close now. However, I
do want to say that the UHJ's letter was the beginning of a long
overdue healing process for me, and my love for the House and for
Baha'u'llah for that healing knows no bounds.

Love,

Suzanne Croisant

Thanks to John and Sholeh for detailed postings on this subject.

I was relieved to see John had said it was difficult to advise Baha'i
students to go into Middle East Studies, not "impossible" to do so.
For surely we must keep our eyes out for those with the brains, tact,
and persistence to deal with the multiple marginalization they will
face. The alternative would be to write off the American Baha'i
community as hopelessly pietist and literalist to ever develop an
intellectual depth.

I would hope that, cynicism aside, all of us agree the American Baha'i
community is *capable* of developing its life of the mind much more;
furthermore, that it is slowly doing so; and that tolerance may be
increasing. I personally think the situation is much better than
this, but I am trying to state a broader position than the one I hold.

The vocational situation in Religious Studies is supposed to improve
over the next decade as those hired in the 1960s retire. Religious
Studies as a field underwent a huge expansion then, so there should be
a lot of vacancies. So far the vacancies have not appeared as fast as
predicted, I think.

I don't know what MESA is predicting about Middle East Studies. The
growing power and wealth of the Islamic world seems to suggest support
for Middle East Studies, overall, should increase. I can not speak
about the marginalization my Middle East Studies colleagues feel in
their field, but I can express my admiration for their successes and
accomplishments. It seems like there is an article or review article
by a Baha'i in every other issue of IJMES. The last time I looked, I
think two of the nine names on the masthead of *Iranian Studies* were
Baha'is. One of the twelve Middle East Studies programs in the U.S.
had a Baha'i at its head until recently (Juan, you're not chair any
more, right?). Perhaps the old adage, "we're number two but we try
harder" applies here.

I think there are several strategies that should be informally
pursued:

1. Encourage minority and female Baha'is to enter Middle East
Studies, Religious Studies, the humanities, and the social sciences
more. As those of us in academia know, the pressure to hire
minorities is pretty strong. Religious Studies, I think, is about 5%
African American. The field is almost desperate to get more
minorities in its doctoral programs. Women are also badly
under-represented and are being sought. Linda, any suggestions?

2. Remind Baha'is interested in the above fields to prepare
themselves for a wide variety of employment alternatives. All the
above fields require good writing, reading, and analytical skills,
skills that are desperately sought in industry. Hence all of these
fields can provide a foundation for other alternatives for employment.

I do not think it is very practical to pursue any of these fields on a
part time basis, though it is not impossible. Those who have
succeeded in Baha'i Studies outside academic fields usually have been
physicians; though this may be historical coincidence. Those who want
to make big contributions to Baha'i Studies without studying the above
mentioned fields full time (and a few other fields, I suppose), will
need: 1) unusual determination and motivation, or extreme genius, or
considerable organizing ability; 2) native familiarity with the
relevant languages, or unusual facility with languages (and preferably
both); 3) the ability to read fast with understanding.

3) Emotional and other support from all of us for those entering
academic fields. I think of Nima's pained letter to the National
Spiritual Assembly (it was to the NSA, wasn't it, Nima?) of a year or
two ago about the anti-intellectualism in the New Mexico Baha'i
community and how much it hurt him. Probably most of us on Talisman
know what that feels like; some of us have experienced it to the
extreme. I have a few stories of my own.

By "and other" the biggest support I can think of is financial. I am
not just referring to all of us opening our own pockets to struggling
students, though that wouldn't be a bad idea. We need scholarship
support, preferably endowed. With the demands of the Arc, I don't see
any fund money budgeted for scholarships any time soon. Even the
four-year program we are starting up in Wilmette at National-Louis
University must be financially self-sufficient and has no financial
aid currently in its budget. So we must find wealthy Baha'is willing
to endow or annually support scholarships.

Other suggestions for things that can be done? No doubt a dose of
reality is a useful thing to give prospective Baha'i scholars; but all
they have to do is subscribe to Taliman for that (g).

-- Rob Stockman

Mark: My remarks with regard to Islamic fundamentalists needs to be
seen in the context in which I equated arguments for a distinctly Baha'i
science as very similar to the same arguments that have been made in Islamic
countries, notably in Pakistan , as I mentioned in the post . I do not think
that was or is an ad hominem argument. As you note fundamentalism is a call
to seperate from the world and I am unable to see how a call for a Baha'i
science or Baha'i studies as I understand how you have defined it to be all
that different from what some Islamicists have argued. This is also not ad
hominem . It is intended as a descriptive statement.
I do not find your comment on the Iqan persuasive . It may well be that
pages 190-200 are a call for how to investigate reality, i believe it has
more to do with openness to spiritual realities than that it provides a
research paradigm for neuroscience.
We probably do agree that the revealed word influences the very atoms of
existence and therefore influences the reflective capacity of human beings.
We may disagree on whether a Baha'i, who happens to be a neuroscientist,,,
will be capable of contributing greater knowledge of that discipline than say
one who is a devout Moslin or Christian or Buddhist or agnostic. There are a
great many agnostic and spiritually inclined scientists who have and are
making massive contributions to human knowledge . I fully expect that to
continue. I just do not see how one can , by virtue of simple being a Baha'i,
assume to have a greater understanding of science or anything else. To do so
places us in a sectarian mode and does not come to grips with the reality of
pluralism. If I make such claims as a Baha'i what is so very different from
that claim and the analagous claims made by those of other religious
traditions? In my heart of hearts I do not believe Baha'u'llah came to
replace one brand of religious hegemony with another. Try as I might I can't
fit a call for a "Baha'i science into a different category. I am open to such
a possibility I just do not see it .
As for a Baha'i approach to science , relationships etc. "barely
resemble(ing) those of modernity" I must say i find a great deal of
commanality with the world view of modernity and the Faith of Baha'u'llah. I
find references to fact , history , sociological truths in the Iqan that are
more than congenial with yes even empirical science as you and I would know
it in sociology.
Many of the giants of natural science were themselves deeply spiritual
beings as you well know . It is the pervasive belief in *Order* which
underlies the attempt to do science. The love of *beauty* motivates a good
deal of pure science. The autobiographical literature of scientific
practitioners is loaded with a love and appreciation of order and beauty.
Seems to me very Baha'i like attitudes.
I do not have the time to try and recapitulate the concept of modernity-
entire books have been written on this , both it's benefits and limitations .
While I do not consider modernity to be the final word with respect to human
development I shudder to think where we would be without it . Equal
opportunity before the law, the concept of the dignity of the human person,
in contrast to ascriptive honor. The very notion of the independent
investigation of reality is a modern attribute par excellance. Baha'u'llah
sacralized that idea, he did not invent it . He extends it from the realm if
exploring the our physical existence to our spiritual existence where in my
opinion it is sorely needed and in a global context is still not universal.
That modernity has been a struggle in the application of human rights
among others issues seems to me a reason for celebration. Humans have been
able to invoke a standard and apply it to to more inclusive human groupings
and spheres of life over the past 3-4 hundred years. there are still plenty
of people on this planet who woiuld turn the clock back > I would hate to see
Baha'i's fall into that category. That modernity has limitations, the
expression of positivism as TRUTH being one of them ought not be confused
with a rejection of modernity. Some of the best pieces on Talisman have dealt
with this theme . Juan Coles Trvellers Narrative commentary in January, Sen
McGlinn's Church/State piece at the same time, and Chris Buck's paper on the
Bisharet as sacralizing modernity among the best. They are examples to me of
Baha'i Studies at it's best. The very facx such thoughts were put to print
assumes the existence of Baha'u'llah's Revelation. They are conscious
attempts to do what the Universal House of Justice has called for in its 24
June 1993 letter regarding the study of the faith" . . the systematic study
of the Writings of the Faith , its history, and the application of its
teachings to the spiritual and material life of society. " What else could
be a definition of Baha'i studies ? I do not see this as a call to create
some seperate branch of learning guided by some special set of rules or
methods peculiar to itself. This is what I *hear * called for when Baha'i's
ask for Baha'i studies . This may not be what you mean . Much of this
concern about the restictions of modernity is not a Baha'i project. It is
shared by many other groups as well . Intellectually it is a continuation of
a long process ,at least in wetern thought. I commentedon this before in
terms of the Romantic rebellion against the French enlightenment. It was
paricularly pronounced among the German Idealists. You and I share many of
the same concerns about the limitations of modernity with them . They however
did nor outright reject modernity per se . We ought to be careful as well .
In a world rampant with political and religious persecution we ought to
align the Faith with the call to universal human dignity and spiritualize
that project , rather than unwittingly lend support to those who would invoke
pre-modern ascriptive standards. Any call for the overtrow of modernity makes
me nervous. I think as Baha'i's we do not have an appreciation of just how
remarkably modern Baha'u'llah was and how much he suffered and Paid the price
for His modernity. His calls for religious and political tolerance were
anything if not modern. Perhaps one of the places Baha'i's , scholars or not
can begin to make a difference is in a more nuanced understanding of the
benefits and limits of modernity. What is worth keeping and what is worth
rejecting . I think we do ourselves and the world a great disservice by
appearing to reject modernity outright. Our Prophet surely did not .

Last point . The comments of Baha'u'lah regarding old world orders or one of
my favorites from tab. of Maqsud " in asmuch as the prevailing order
appeareth to be lamentably defective . ." I believe these comments have more
to do with validating the emergence of a global society- a modern project-
and the rejection of the despotic government of the time and our time. I do
not see in it a rejection of modernity tout court. I think Baha'u'lah
intended to spiritualize modernity or civilize it if you will. I do not
think His aim was to reject or overthrow modernity . The last thing i see in
His remarks about old orders is a call for the Baha'i administration to
take over the world . You may not be calling for this though your
interpretation of old order and modernity could be read that way.
I hope this clarifies some of my earlier remarks and points to some
areas of possible agreement as well as highlights those areas where we may
legitimely continue to hold different points of view.
warm regards,
Terry

To: Mark A. Foster,<mfoster@tyrell.net>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Bcc:
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Modernity History sc
Date: Friday, May 19, 1995 23:57:37 EZT
Attach:
Certify: N
Forwarded by:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mark: I think you have not entirely understood where Terry is coming
from with his comment about Muslim "fundamentalism." This is probably
because "fundamentalism" is a vague and unsatisfactory term.

In fact, there is a rather vigorous movement among Islamists who aim at
"Islamizing the social sciences" or the sciences more generally. The
people are often Ph.D.s or engineers, and they wish to adopt a "Qur'ani
paradigm" within which to do "science" of various sorts, including social
science. I agree with Terry that many of the things you and others
wedded to a "Baha'i studies" paradigm say sound an awfully lot like the
things these Muslim intellectuals say. Before you dismiss the
similarity, it might be worthwhile your taking a look at the Islamist
literature. "Interviewing" a few so-called "Muslim fundamentalists"
won't settle the issue, since the latter may not be part of the
"Islamizing the social sciences" movement.

I don't think "modernists" is a good term for me, John Walbridge, Tony
Lee, and other Baha'is who are willing to cede the sciences and social
sciences primacy with regard to the discovery of truth within their own
domains. This concession is simply obedience to `Abdu'l-Baha's own
principle. I don't think it needs a name--it is just being a Baha'i and
a rational human being. As for the position that scripture consists of
inerrant propositions that should always over-rule all conflicting
propositions, I think we all know what that is called in the U.S.

For me, Baha'i scriptures are a source of ethical values that are very
valuable in helping Baha'i scholars of various sorts do their work. But
those scriptures, revealed in specific human languages at specific times
to specific audiences, inevitably contain some propositions that are
historically conditioned and, in the light of later advances, incorrect.
You can then interpret them "symbolically" if you like. But Noah did not
live hundreds of years (Iqan); Socrates never met with or learned
anything from any Hebrew prophets; and so forth.

American Baha'is have created a somewhat "fundamentalist" culture in
which the Baha'i writings are taken as a sort of static and contextless
propositions about "reality," which are elevated above all other
propositions. This is partially because the people who created this
tradition were ignorant of the original languages, context and history
of the Faith; it was a mysterious, Oriental whole that challenged the
ordinary American viewpoint. It is also, quite frankly, because the
people who created this tradition were not very educated or possessed of
much in the way of broad culture.

Baha'is keep saying they want more "persons of capacity" in the Faith.
Well, I'm afraid that Talisman is a lot what their version of the Baha'i
faith would look like. Relatively few persons of capacity are willing to
subordinate reason and experience entirely to propositions extracted
acontextually from a body of scripture.

As for "modernists" being "afraid" and "cowering" before the authority of
modernity, I really think that remark was frankly insulting. It impugns
the motives of one's intellectual interlocutors. No one has made any
arguments on Talisman because they are afraid. We are seeking the truth,
which takes a great deal more courage than blind conformism.

Anyway, modernism is over with (or at the very least, if one takes
Habermas's riposte, is a project that has moved far beyond its founding
principles). The real question is what the Baha'i faith offers the
postmodern world.

cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan

To: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Bcc:
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
Subject: Re: Dawnbreakers & Myth
Date: Tuesday, May 23, 1995 1:58:52 EZT
Attach:
Certify: N
Forwarded by:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Robert,
Thanks for the thoughts ! What do you think is the one good idea? What
are some of the asides which you think more interesting that could be
expanded ? Not being a good analytic thinker it is harder for me to pick
these out . When Mark and I had our nearly two hour telephone conversation
we concluded he was more analytic and I was more synthetic.
The post is I think a break with with the dominant sense of time in
*modernity * . Time has pretty much been collapsed into profane time and is
homogenous. It is sort of like everything is in boxes and their relationship
only exists if it is a linear one in profane time.A few years ago I had a
series of experiences, mystical or otherwise, which shattered my sense of
conventional time . I think it was those experiences which opened up my
feeling about Dawnbreakers and of course the Siyah Chal experience of
Baha'u'llah and the Maiden. The past is still present in a future already
being born in the souls of humanity.In that sense the Dawnbreakers are still
alive and speak to me . They are more than metaphore or allegories . They
both are spiritual beings and represent( not a popular word I understand in
epistemology these days) spiritual realities which actualized in their souls
assist in the transfer from potentiality to actuality within my soul of the
*names * . As a result we can speak to one another , if I listen long enough
to learn the language. Does this make any sense? I see this in your
argument about Socrates and jewish pilosophers. There is a different sense of
time implicit in the argument, aside from Abdu'l Baha on infallibility. It is
in this sense that I find Sen's piece a confimation of your basic argument.
With apologies to Sheila , Dave, Alma and the other poets on the net I
am going to include a poem in which I try to capture one of those time
shattering experiences I had on the Declaration of the Bab a couple of years
ago . With that - a blessed Declaration(creation) to you all . I am going to
be spending the next 24 hours, incognito , . . on the Road To Shiraz !

"In the Beginning"

Ascending inward,
in the presence of light,
a passage, a portal,
membrane-like.
The warnth of a mother, seen by a son,
to gaze upon such Beauty as one -
the darkness of twilight soon disappears,
no more darkness lurks around this night.
Passing the barrier,
naught but the celestial Beloved,
bathed in rich emerald Light.
Halted in awe, unable to progress.
The aching, the longing for His Beauty.
If only a brief scent or a caress for my heart,
the burning fragrance inhaled from the
flowing Robe of Light.
To know then an end,
to the forgetting
of this, - the Eternal Remembrance,
the Primal Point.

Warm Regards,
Terry

To: m_lips@COMU3.auckland.ac.nz,talisman@indiana.edu
Cc:
Bcc:
From: m.lips@auckland.ac.nz
Subject: NZ Convention
Date: Tuesday, May 2, 1995 8:34:11 EZT
Attach:
Certify: N
Forwarded by:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Happy 12th day of Ridvan!

Read the convention report from the America and felt like adding another
convention experience. In New Zealand we had 56 delegates attending the
conference. 9 Maori of which 7 were women (Maori are about 12% of the
population), two Pacific Islanders, 1 south african, 1 chinese, at least 5
persians, 1 dutch (me) etc. A diverse crowd. Our convention started of with a
welcome for the new LSA from former Ratana church members (see previous postings
by others), in the traditional Maori manner, speeches, return speeches, singing,
and the traditional greeting by pressing noses (breathing the same breath,
becoming part of each other. A great start to a convention that only got better
from there on. Not one unconstructive comment was made, no house rules were
necessary as we all longed to hear everybody speak, the delegates at the
convention raised 9 Arc units, this is a huge sacrifice considering that the
average income in New Zealand is less than half of the US income, and this is by
no means different for the delegates, however we all felt that there was no way
we could go back to our communities and appeal for more money if we didn't make
the utmost sacrifice ourselves. When people got up to speak, they were
challenged to finish there contribution by singing a waiata (song) in Maori
tradition. This greatly enhanced the flow and joy in the consultation. A former
member of the board of counsellors mr. Owen Battrick, died just before the
convention started (with his boots on, as the NSA of Great Britain wrote) in
Tahiti, his spirit and presence was strongly felt and a call was made for
teaching projects in his name. The consultation took place in the same way as
the Arc is being built; all levels and issues were addressed at the same time,
instead of this being confusing, it gave a much better flow to the consultation
and the whole agenda got addressed. There were tears, laughter and lots of
prayers. Man speaking about their worries for their children (especially the
youth), women speaking on economic development projects and scholarship, in
reference to the Arc we specifically discussed the spiritual implications of
sacrifice and how, in the western world, we have great trouble with sacrificing.
Advancement of women was consulted on in a both realistic and very uplifting
way, etc. It was a wonderful absolutely uplifting experience. And a great
privilege to be attending as a delegate. The delegates took two hours of praying
and meditating to elect the new NSA (1 Maori, 2 Persians, 1 Pacific Islander, 1
american (Ken Zemke) and 4 New Zealand Pakeha, 5 men, four women). At the
closure of the convention, the silly western approach was taken, with three
people lining up to say their prayers, this however was not to be, one by one,
delegates and members of the audience (which was large most of the time)
continued to chant and sing prayers in a multitude of styles and languages for
about an hour which was a beautiful closure to a momentous 4 days!

Marjo

PS Here Down Under, I definitely think the 19 May letter was written to the NSA
of the USA (:, however we have studied it very seriously here in NZ and are
grateful for the audacity of the USA-NSA to request this meeting, otherwise we
would never have had such a beautiful document, from which we have taken much to
heart.

This was the first posting, right after the bombing.

______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: OKC Baha'is OK, need prayers
Author: CVKBahai@aol.com at INTERNET
Date: 4/20/95 12:07 PM

So many of the Baha'i friends from other areas have called to see if any of
the friends in Oklahoma City were injured in the bombing yesterday, I thought
it might help to put out a general reassurance. Although several of the
friends work in downtown buildings, none that we know of worked in the Alfred
P. Murrah Federal Building. Two of the friends you may know, Alex Resnick and
Esperanza Sabet, worked in the County Clerk's office 2 blocks over, and
although the windows were blown out all over the building, they got out
safely with barely a scratch. Alex has a souvenir piece of shrapnel that was
blown into his car, which he is grateful was not in him. It has been
difficult for the last 24 hours to get a phone line out to call and reassure
friends and family in other states. Amelia Movafagh Moncho got a call
yesterday from her husband Rocky's mom in Botswana, who had heard about it on
the BBC and worried that one of the friends she'd met here at their wedding
might have been hurt. News travels so quickly!
Our house is on a hill about 15 miles from downtown Oklahoma City. I felt
and heard the explosion and my first thought as my house and floor shook was
that one of the drunks who frequently take out my lawn and flower beds on
their way around our corner had finally plowed into our garage, it felt so
close! I ran outside and looked for wreckage of a car or maybe a crashed
airplane in my front yard and saw dark smoke blowing to the north from
downtown, far away, and a strange double-decker light gray mushroom cloud
ascending vertically from between the skyscrapers. I couldn't imagine that
any fire or gas explosion with smoke already that far dispersed, that far away
could have anything to do with that long, loud concussive shaking I'd felt,
until I realized that sound does, indeed take time to travel. I inexplicably
burst into tears and started muttering the short prayer for the departed as I
went into the house...I really felt a crush of death looking at that cloud. By
the time I turned on the TV there was a "tower cam" shot of the downtown area
on the news and shortly the Ch.9 helicopter rounded the north side of the
Federal Building and the newsman and I both gasped together "O my Lord God!"
seeing the whole north side of the building clawed away.It wasn't till my
husband called last night that I was reminded that a friend of ours worked as
head of maintenance in that building, and he had a window office on the first
floor on the north side. I couldn't imagine that he could be alive, there
being a void where his office had been, but after calling his house, his
sister-in-law said he was in University Hospital, all broken up and lacerated
and eventually recoverable. God is Most Merciful!
YaBaha'u'l-Abha!
My personal feelings are that this is an opportunity for prayer vigils, to
listen to people who are stressed and shaken and reassure them that God still
is in ultimate control of the world, that He did not do this, nor allow it to
happen to innocent children out of spite or cruelty, but that perhaps in the
horrible sacrifice of so many lives there is a ransom that will turn hearts
around the world back to "our Father in Heaven, Who is able to deliver us
from our humiliations."
With so many souls to "pray into" the Abha Kingdom, to ease the violence
of their transition into the next world by our fervent intercession on their
behalf, we can hardly worry about our own small tribulations in life, which
can only strengthen us for the tasks ahead anyway.
In an attempt to do something, anything in response to the loss of so many
mothers and fathers and friends and children, the local people today are
wearing blue ribbons, the sky blue of the background of the Oklahoma state
flag.
Deepening on the Writings about tests as gifts from God, is helpful in
being able to talk to people who wonder how such an awful thing could happen
to some of the nicest people on earth. Deepening on the life of Muhammad and
His teachings would also help.
We worry also about a backlash against the Middle Eastern residents of
Oklahoma in the face of speculation about who the terrorists might be who
could do such a thing. I can't help but regret tremendously in hindsight that
we haven't done a better job in educating our predominantly Christian
neighbors about the truth of Muhammad's Mission and teachings, so that they
could not jump to erroneous assumptions about any evil intent against
Christians in the true religion of Islam. It will be even more difficult now
to defend Islam in the process of teaching the Faith, with this increase in
suspicion and hostility that is generalizing toward anyone of Islamic
background.
This all further reinforces in my own heart the narrowing of our windows of
opportunity to freely teach the Faith in these harrowing times, when there is
a winnowing process: while some hearts are turned by tragedies such as ours
toward God for His mercy and relief, many others are hardened and made even
more cynical. We have to toughen our skin against the ridicule or scorn of
those who have been turned to chaff, and set our hearts to the urgent task of
more rapidly and effectively gleaning from the teaching field those souls who
have truly been prepared to hear the Message, and can benefit from
Baha'u'llah's healing Words.
We have not yet any organized service project in response to the bombing, I
think everyone's too shaken to think straight. As area Assemblies are able to
meet, perhaps that will be one avenue taken.

But for now, please, please take time to add your prayers to ours that
Baha'u'llah will guide us to turn this crisis to a victory of the spirit,
that these people's lives will not have been lost with no spiritual benefit
to the travailing society left behind.

Sincerely,
Cindy Van Kley
Spencer (rural suburb of OKC), Oklahoma

This was the first posting, right after the bombing.

______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: OKC Baha'is OK, need prayers
Author: CVKBahai@aol.com at INTERNET
Date: 4/20/95 12:07 PM

Thought you'd all like to hear the latest from Oklahoma City. I'll
send the others as I get them.

______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: OKC Journal #9
Author: CVKBahai@aol.com at INTERNET
Date: 4/30/95 7:07 AM

Friends, I haven't done anything "normal" since April 19th. Today, a Baha'i
Holy Day, we went to the park for a picnic and to the mall in Midwest City.
I was just overwhelmed and moved to tears (for the bazillionth time this
week!) to see that there were empty stores in both ends of the mall that had
been FILLED (no exaggeration) with giant 4'x8' freestanding foamcore
"greeting card" displays sent from sister malls (managed or owned by the same
management company, according to a friend of mine who works in the mall
office) all over the country. Each one creatively displayed the name of the
community that sent it, and was covered with expressions of sympathy,
prayers, hope, consolation and admiration for the heroic recovery work and
the spirit of our people. How they got the project coordinated, gathered the
comments of mall shoppers handwritten onto the big boards and shipped them
here so quickly (Nancy said they put them up 2 days ago!) I can't imagine,
but if anyone doubts the sincerity or usefulness of such an effort, let me
assure you the two "love rooms" were full of people reading the messages and
just weeping, weeping. You can't imagine the feeling (and I can't begin to
express it) of knowing the extent of support and sympathy directed our way.
Everyone is just a raw nerve at this point, from emptying, emptying...what?
Feelings, sorrow, anger, gratitude, worry, comfort, just everything -- it
all just tumbles out spontaneously to friends and strangers alike. You know
how people usually stand in an elevator or store checkout line and act like
they're alone in a crowd, just waiting for the uncomfortable moment to pass?
It just can't happen around here anymore, at least not in Midwest City where
I do my shopping. You don't have to know someone to know that they share this
one big SOMETHING in common with you. I've listened to so many complete
strangers share their grief or anger or just the added difficulty of their
life with me.
Yesterday morning while I was working at a friend's shop, a middle-aged black
woman came in, obviously dressed in funeral attire, to make some copies. She
said she'd just buried her cousin and had another funeral for the child of a
friend to go to in the afternoon. I was thinking she looked so blank, maybe
too far past grief. She asked to use the phone and called her children to
warn them that their father was leaving town after the funeral and would
likely be coming by to try to abduct them since he knew she had another
funeral, so to go to the neighbor's house. I couldn't help overhearing, of
course, and I asked if that was for real, and she said "Yes, but I can't even
deal with it right now, I can't even be mad at him." I was just stunned at
the impossibility of handling any more stress in this poor woman's life, and
I impulsively came out from behind the counter and told her, "sweetheart, I
just know you need a hug!" She just melted in my arms and dissolved into
tears. She must have been trying so hard to hold it together for just too
long. Then after a minute she said simply, "I can make it now, thanks" and
rushed to her next errand or maybe the funeral. I keep thinking there's a
city full of people going through the motions, just trying to get THROUGH all
this, but it just keeps coming in waves, grief upon grief.
It hangs over everything, coloring every otherwise normal activity. Should
they hold the Arts Festival (one of the biggest annual events here, a week
long, for which the tents and booths and decorations had already been put up
days before the bombing, but whose unfortunate location was just blocks from
the rubble site)? No, it was cancelled. Should the OKC Cavalry basketball
games go on in the Myriad Convention Center downtown, in spite of its being
used for meals and sleeping quarters for rescue workers? There's ongoing
debate.
In spite of everything else, people are helping people more than I've ever
seen before, almost like a city-wide compulsion. Just smiling at strangers in
passing, a common tradition in Oklahoma any time, has taken on a new nuance
of expression, like "you're probably hurting, too, isn't it sad?" in the tilt
of the head or the crinkle of the eyes. Maybe we're actually becoming "one
soul in many bodies", like one big heart. Is this how God has contrived to
transform humanity? We know Baha'u'llah told us it would be so, and
constantly adjured us to think and feel and act in just such a way. I opened
"Foundations of World Unity" by 'Abdu'l-Baha the other day for the first time
in years, and, of course in my present frame of mind, EVERYTHING related to
this whole bombing thing. Especially in the chapter on "The Need of Divine
Education", where he says such things as "How ignorant they are! That which
is forbidden by God they consider acceptable to Him. God is love; God seeketh
fellowship, purity, sanctity and long-suffering; these are the attributes of
divinity." (that pertains to the customer yesterday who had the nerve to tell
me that t, "God wants us to quit cooperating with this evil government and
refuse to pay taxes if we have to use a social security number, because you're
taking on the mark of the beast like it says in Revelations!" He must have
friends in the Militia Movement...). He also says on p. 73, "My admonition
and exhortation to you is this: Be kind to all people, love humanity, consider
all mankind as your relations and servants of the most high God. Strive day
and night that animosity and contention shall pass away from the hearts of
men.... Therefore love humanity with all your heart and soul. If you meet a
poor man, assist him; if you see the sick, heal him; reassure the affrighted
one, render the cowardly noble and courageous, educate the ignorant,
associate with the stranger. Emulate God. Consider how kindly, how lovingly
He deals with all and follow His example."
Well, you know how we sometimes read that stuff and think, "yes, we should
all be nice and good when we can, blah, blah, blah...", but now, having seen
that injunction put into action by people, the vast majority of whom never
heard those words nor knew just why they were doing it, I feel a great
urgency to spread that thought, broaden my "humanity hug" and say, "Look!
Look! THAT's what it looks like! It isn't just nice words to think about!
It's ACTIONS!"
So now I think, what can we do to help now that we've offered our constant
prayers, sent monetary contributions for relief efforts and written letters
to the governor and mayor from our various Baha'i communities expressing our
love and support? RANDOM ACTS OF KINDNESS!!!!! All that neato stuff
'Abdu'l-Baha told us to do...just drop all our "important" things to do this
"most important" thing, wherever we live, just go and "be" 'Abdu'l-Baha for
as many people, preferably strangers, as you can. You don't have to tell them
you're a Baha'i or explain why you're doing it, as the ads say "Just do it!"

BTW, several people have EMailed me asking if they can use parts of my
journals for their newsletters to keep their community up on what's
happening. Yes, yes! Anyone everywhere. Also, if you missed it, we were NOT
able to participate in the National Day of Mourning service, but I know all
of your individual prayers had a healing effect anyway. Gosh, I feel like the
world is bathed in prayer these days. It feels great. Why didn't we think of
it before? I shared my growing collection of messages from Baha'is around
the world at Feast in Midwest City and they were so amazed and touched!
Well, this is even longer than my usual long-windedness! Much love to all,
Cindy

To: JWALBRID@ucs.indiana.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Bcc:
From: Safa Sadeghpour <IZZYJ9Y@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU>
Subject: Re: Greek philosophers travelling to the Orient
Date: Tuesday, May 16, 1995 4:54:46 EZT
Attach:
Certify: N
Forwarded by:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------TEXT-OF-YOUR-MAIL--------------------------------

> Date: Mon, 15 May 95 17:33:41 EWT
> From: JWALBRID@UCS.INDIANA.EDU
> Subject: Greek philosophers travelling to the Orient
> To: talisman@INDIANA.EDU
> Sender: owner-talisman@INDIANA.EDU
>
> The traditions that the Greek philosophers studied with the Israelite
> prophets are unsupportable on chronological grounds. There is rather
> better evidence of contacts of other sorts with Persia, Babylonia, and
> Egypt. Philosophy started in Ionia, which was for much of that time
> a Persian province. The sources all agree that Pythagoras came from
> a Greek family settled in Phoenicia and that he studied in Egypt. Since
> there were long-standing Greek contacts with both Egypt and Syria,
> this is not improbable. On the other hand, there is really nothing like
> Greek philosophy in these countries.
>
> john walbridge
>
Yes... this is true but as you said "there is really nothing like
Greek philosophy in these countries." For instance, Egypt used
mathematics for only practical uses such as calculating the floodings
of the Nile without any interest in understanding the science for its
own sake. The same occurred in Babylonia regarding Astronomy and
Mathematics inasmuch as they had created it to support their
concept of astrology, and not for the understanding of the universe
alone.

Additionally, even if science emerged first from Egypt or Babylonia
it's dubious that this was the result of a REVEALED religion simply
because the evidence left of their polytheistic attitudes towards the
universe. Therefore, it seems at present that science and religion
appeared independently of each other in all societies in greater or
lesser scale. And this seems understandable since humans have wondered
about the nature of the universe since pre-historic times.

With Profound Love,

safa sadeghpour

To: Baha'i,Announce,<Bahai-Announce@BCCA.Org>
Cc:
Bcc:
From: Miguel Watler <pewatler@cyf-kr.edu.pl>
Subject:
Date: Friday, May 12, 1995 7:29:07 EZT
Attach:
Certify: N
Forwarded by:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Summer Projects, Poland.

Allah'u'abha dear friends,

The following is a short summary of teaching projects in Poland this
summer. which I am sending on behalf of the National Teaching Committee
of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Poland.

---------------------------------------------------------
1. Szczecin, June 18-30, Direct Teaching.
2. Krakow, June 24 - July 8, Language Classes.
3. Poznan, July 8-22, Language Classes and Direct Teaching.
4. Katowice, July 22 - August 5, Direct Teaching.
5. Nowy Sacz, August 5-12, Direct Teaching.

(Summer School, August 13-20)

6. Bialystok, August 21-28, Cross Border Teaching with Lithuania.
7. Gdansk, August 28 - September 7, Teaching in Schools.
---------------------------------------------------------

For more information about projects in Poland this summer, and
information for travelling teachers and prospective pioneers, please
contact the National Teaching Committee, Poland through this e-mail
address, or through the National Center at:

UL. Nowogrodzka 18A/4
00-511 Warsaw Poland
tel/fax (48-2)621-7954

With warm Baha'i greetings,

Miguel Watler, secretary of the National Teaching Committee, Poland.
pewatler@cyf-kr.edu.pl

Dear Mark and Jim,

You sound so embattled! Oh those masses of Philistines with their
faddishness, their lack of subtlety, their love of magic! I know the feeling.
I'm an artist and I know what I like too. As I put in my .05 today (I have
high self-esteem) I want to defend cults, especially the 12 step ones.

"The problem," Jim says, "is that America makes a religion out of every new
psycho-babble movement that comes along." That's certainly true! We're very
creative that way, very energetic, very hopeful, very eager, and we can make
a religion out of just about anything and we do.This is the land of the Power
of Positive Thinking and the land of Elvis, who, many insist, either never
died or has returned from the grave. The list of cults and cult-like
phenomena is endless. Sometimes people put on funny hats, sometimes they
mouth slogans, sometimes they murder, sometimes they hold seances. Sometimes
people lead conventionally rational lives in every way, but of course, their
faith in rationality is a little overdone, a little misplaced. The Lord,
after all, is Hidden. "For minds cannot grasp Me nor hearts contain
Me."(Hidden Words) Having human minds, we have to have mental images of what
we worship which are, by definition, wholly inadequate, even false.And our
community has a long way to go to being a Baha'i community. So as the Old
World Order collapses and the New one is born, we have to realize that for
all of us old and New are mixed up within us. For all of us, no exceptions
since Abdu'l Baha. We use inadequate pictures, clumsy symbols to grasp at the
truth. If we don't labor over our language we speak in cliches. In many
groups people have favorite cliches which they use to show their membership.
What a bounty!;-)AA has proved very popular and as a discourse that
encourages working in groups, a form of consultation, abstinance from
mind-altering substances and seeking refuge in God, as well as tolerance in
matters of doctrine("Higher Power") and, despite its "neo-Lutheran" sources
involves in the 12 steps a program which stresses the need for works as well
as faith, and has provided inspiration and assistance and a fertile field of
teaching for many Baha'is, who have often, unfortunately, found Baha'is, even
when not sociologists hostile to depth psychology, judgemental and unhelpful.
Birf was created as a support group for people in support groups to help them
bridge the gap to their Baha'i community, and to help them teach. Birf really
is in many ways an early teaching institute. The other thing about Birf is th
at it exists to help Baha'is deal with the fact that they often have a
stronger sense of community in their AA groups than in their Baha'i
community, where people often want to pretend they are perfect.

Now, in its cultish aspect, people do turn to 12 step programs, as to
anything else, as if it were a religion. They try to make it into what they
are seeking, and of course, it isn't, and when people look to anything to be
what it isn't,distortions arise. The same goes for anything. AA is for the
people who go to the meetings. A movement has grown up around it because the
power and beauty of people working together in such a way for such a purpose
is attractive, and people want to be a part of it. If they have to define
themselves as victims for "a trace of the traceless Friend" they will do it.
Whether this is wise is not the question, although I don't think it is as
black and white an issue as you have painted it.Popularizers like John
Bradshaw and Melody Beatty and many others have tried to extend the
application of the 12 steps for a lot of reasons. The idea of codependency as
it expands to take in the whole population becomes a psychologized way of
saying that the society is spiritually sick. I think we can agree on that.
Don't be so hard on John Bradshaw for trying. He's not the Divine Physician!
In any case, the attempt to define it as a psychiatric condition is far from
the strongest way to make a case for it. Codependency is a
relationship-effect, and descriptions of it grew out of family therapy.The
condition of codependency is simply a condition of being under stress because
of acting out within the family. People react to stress in many ways. As far
as the DSM IIIR is concerned, syndromes like posttraumatic stress disorder
can be invoked to describe the symptomology that can be involved. The
diagnoses in DSM IIIR are merely descriptive, anyway, they do not establish,
except in a few cases, definitive disorders, as in even such a condition as
schizophrenia, specific etiology is unknown. Family therapy and group
therapy and group family therapy can be very effective. I have seen it work.
Critics who analyze social trends themselves labor under the delusion that
they can put their finger on the nation's ills and show people the way. As
people move from one clumsy geuss at what God wants to another, we should not
be concerned to criticize their efforts but to praise them and show them
where they are correct and not only share what we know but enlist their aid
in helping us to understand the Teachings. That is teaching.
We have to have images and metaphors to form our understanding of things.
We cannot create culture out of thin air. Culture comes from culture as
language grows from language.When we say we want new Baha'i ideas *rather
than* ideas from elsewhere, we are saying that we want to pretend to
originality and refuse to admit where our ideas come from. Originality for
humans means recombining, resynthesizing what is around us. As Baha'is we
spend most of our time reducing our own faith to a static complacent parody
of itself and abandoning our God and ourselves by worshipping our paltry
misconceptions.

About seances...How many times did Abdu'l-Baha speak to Theosophical
Societies? How did He speak to them? Did He concern Himself with exposing
Madame Blavatsky as a fraud?

It rained so hard the night I left
The weather it was dry

And was so hot I froze to death
Suzannah, don't you cry!

with a banjo always on my knee,

david taylor

To: shodjai@mprgate.mpr.ca,(Foad Shodjai)
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu,(Talisman Group)
Bcc:
From: "S. Tedjarati" <stedjara@HK.Super.NET>
Subject: Re: Looking for...
Date: Wednesday, May 3, 1995 16:05:38 EZT
Attach:
Certify: N
Forwarded by:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Foad,

> I am looking for references on the followings:
>
> 1. the early gathering of the verses of the Quran and its
> compilation in a written form. I like to know the medium on which it
> was recorded and the year.
>
> 2. any inventory of the Hadith? how many?
>
> I am looking for references where I can refer to these, Baha'i or
> not. Please either reply to me privately, or post to the group.

Some quick references for you about Qur'an and Hadith:

1. Siyyid-i-Rusul - Hadrat-i-Muhammad Islam va Mazahib An
Dr. R. Qadimi

Pages 38-57. He explains about both these subjects.

2. Zindiganiy-i-Muhammad
Dr. Muhammad Husayn Haykal (2 vols)

One of the best books on the subject available in Persian.

3. Tarikh-i-Anbiya
N. Olyai

Not the best reading but quite a bit of information there.

4. Muhammad - His life based on the earlist sources
Martin Lings

No specifics on what you want but is quite resourceful.

For a more comprehensive listing, I am sure Ahang and others can supply
several mega-bytes of information any time ...

regards,
Shahrooz
______________________________________________________________________________
S. Tedjarati e-mail: stedjara@HK.Super.NET
Unisys China/Hong Kong LTD Tel: (852) 879-3850

1. In regard to the various views expressed about the nature of God
(personal or unknowable), the relationship of Baha'u'llah to God (human or
very God of very God), salvation, and other theological issues: These
matters cannot be settled in the Baha'i Faith, and should not be. Some
religions, such as medieval Christianity, made the mistake of thinking
that religion was about right doctrinal belief (otho-doxy). Baha'u'llah
and `Abdu'l-Baha had nothing but contempt for this definition of
religion, wherein St. (!) Augustine has Pelagius burned at the stake for
believing in the wrong doctrine of salvation. The "Right Doctrine" idea
of religion derived from the idea that every proposition is either true or
false and cannot be both at the same time (the Aristotelian "excluded
middle"), and that true propositions are universally (acontextually) true.
Thus, the doctrinal proposition "Jesus is God" was either true or
false; if true, it had to be imposed on those (the Nestorians e.g.) who
did not accept it. A good deal of bloodshed and rancor was thus generated.
Baha'u'llah rejected Aristotelian epistemology. For him, a
proposition is not universal. Its truth-content depends on *who* asserts
it, upon that person's stage of spiritual evolution, and when it is
asserted. All metaphysical propositions are highly contextual and relative,
none are
universal. Baha'u'llah's insight here (which goes back to Sufism and the
School of Isfahan, no doubt, though I haven't traced epistemology that way)
is very modern. I think, as Susan Brill showed, it has resonances with
Wittgenstein. As a historian, I find it extremely congenial.
Therefore, if Baha'i X says, "Baha'u'llah is God," then that reflects
that individual's stage of spiritual progress. Moreover, the proposition
makes sense only on certain planes. Thus, Bijan has pointed out that the
Manifestation is in the Station (maqam) of the Self of God only in the
realms of Amr (Command) and Creation (khalq). But it would be wrong to
assert such an identity at the level of, e.g., Hahut, wherein God
subsists alone and there is nothing but Him (`Abdu'l-Baha's Commentary on
`I was a Hidden Treasure.')
So we do not have a universal doctrinal proposition that can usefully
be pressed on every Baha'i. We only have a proposition of the following
sort: "Baha'i X, who has reached such-and-such a spiritual plane,
perceives Baha'u'llah to be God (in the worlds of Command and Creation)."
One can add, "Baha'i Y, on the other hand, who subsists on such-and-such
spiritual plane, perceives the historical Baha'u'llah to be human
(especially with reference to the plane of Hahut)."
If things are put thus, there is no need to burn anyone at the stake
or indoctrinate anyone into a universal theology; indeed, that would be
wrong. The logical response to a doctrinal statement from a fellow
believer with which one disagreed would be, "Hmmm, Cole seems to be
thinking about Hahut today."
As I tried to show a couple of weeks ago, Baha'u'llah *also* did not
think that religion is about Law, which has tended to be the Judaic and
Islamic emphasis.
If religion is neither about Right Doctrine nor about Law, then what
is it about? Baha'u'llah is clear: it is about human acquisition of
divine perfections.
How are perfections acquired and incorporated into the character?
First of all, life in this world, a social life in which the individual
must navigate between Self and Other, is *in itself* a means of acquiring
perfections. Thus, a Chinese Communist who has never been religious or
believed in God is nevertheless by virtue of living in the world on a
path of potential perfection-acquisition, assuming she learns to
implement the Golden Rule.
Universal, "Natural Religion" is the school of hard knocks. Adopting
a Manifestation of God as a Teacher is a way of potentially advancing
more quickly and avoiding certain pitfalls. The most recent
Manifestation is teaching the most accessible syllabus. But not every
Baha'i is ipso facto more advanced in perfection-acquisition than every
Chinese communist.
"Salvation" is thus perfection-acquisition, which is in turn based in
the essential insight that we should do unto others as we would have them
do unto us. This is not a platitude or a reduction of religion to dry
ethics. Perfection-acquisition is a rollicking spiritual adventure,
beset with the depths of self-hatred and the peaks of ecstatic insight.
What Baha'u'llah means to say at the beginning of the Aqdas in
asserting that both recognition of the Manifestation and obeying His
commands is a primary duty, and that neither of these is "acceptable"
without the other, is that an accelerated *perfection-acquisition*
beyond what can occur in "natural religion" depends on both
attaining mystical insight into the Manifestation of the Age and upon
disciplining the `soul at the command of evil' through striving for
obedience to His commands.
"Salvation," like "Right Doctrine" has no absolute, universal
meaning, anyway. It is individual-specific, plane-specific,
context-specific. It is not about Right Doctrine, nor essentially about
Law. It is about "labayka," about the profound response of the soul to
God's call to the world of perfections.

cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan

To: LWALBRID@ucs.indiana.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Bcc:
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: dogma and liberation
Date: Tuesday, May 2, 1995 0:21:32 EZT
Attach:
Certify: N
Forwarded by:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gee, Linda, I thought I was supporting my dear friends Ahang and Bijan.
I was saying that Ahang's "high theophanology" is just as valid as my
quest for the historical Baha'u'llah. Of course these learned gentlemen,
reared in this glorious Faith and steeped in its scriptures, do not need
my support. But let my message not be seen as having been negative (at
least not toward anyone but St. Augustine; I have trouble forgiving
people who burn others at the stake for thought crimes. As for the
contemporary Vatican, it actually tried Hans Kung and Schillebeeckx (sp?),
silenced Leonardo Boff, etc., etc.; I think dogma is extremely important
both to the Pope and to Ratzinger, and that they move against Catholic
intellectuals on that basis.)

Tim: I had earlier cited Baha'u'llah Himself, from an untranslated
Tablet in Iqtidarat, p. 167: "This Revelation hath not come for the sake
of implementing outward laws, as is inscribed in the Bayan by the Pen of
the All-Merciful. Rather it hath come for the sake of the manifestations
of perfection in human souls and the ascent of their spirits to the
stations of everlasting life." (provisional).

Baha'u'llah's dismissive attitude toward dogma is evident throughout His
writings, especially in his Tablet to Manakji via Mirza Abu'l-Fadl and
his Tablet to Jamal-i Burujirdi. In the latter he explicitly says that
the difference between those who believe Baha'u'llah to be God and those
who emphasize his humanity is a result of the differing spiritual planes
and perceptions of the believers. The Tablet has been translated in
Baha'i Studies Bulletin.

The point is not that we should disregard the laws or that we have no
common beliefs or discourse. It is that the laws and the religious
discourse have as their purpose our acquisition of perfections. If we
import ego into the matter and fall to squabbling about the definition of
Baha'u'llah's station, we may think of ourselves as defending
Baha'u'llah; but in fact, we are departing from the right path since this
squabbling is detracting from perfection-acquisition. I was not
directing my comments toward anyone in particular (maybe even was
reminding myself to "do the good I know" [o.k., Augustine said some good
things.])

Tim's questions are pertinent, but most seem to assume that I was
advocating an absolute relativism. There is a difference between saying
that a statement is only meaningful in a certain context and saying that
there is no truth. Here, I think the later Wittgenstein has many of the
answers. (That is, is helpful in approaching Baha'u'llah's
non-Aristotelian theory of propositions).

cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan

Dear Juan, you wrote:

> Baha'u'llah rejected Aristotelian epistemology. For him, a
>proposition is not universal. Its truth-content depends on *who* asserts
>it, upon that person's stage of spiritual evolution, and when it is
>asserted. All metaphysical propositions are highly contextual and
>relative, none are universal.

Juan, I might agree with this, but I'm not sure what it means.
If someone says: "The condition of one's soul in the next life is affected
(n.b. affected, not determined), by how one lives in this life." Is this
not universal? Under what conditions would it not be true?
I understand and agree with the principle that a proposition might be
true in some circumstances and not in others. So, I think many statements
are not true unconditionally; context does matter. But
are there absolutely no statements which are universally true?
Actually, there must be some, because the proposition: "No propositions
are universally true." is itself a statement which claims to be universally
true. That proposition denies itself.

As to the idea that

> Its truth-content depends on *who* asserts
>it, upon that person's stage of spiritual evolution, and when it is
>asserted.

I think I see, through a fog, what you mean, but I would like a clearer
understanding. Suppose someone says: " Every human being has a non-material
eternal essence which survives physical death."
How can the truth of a statement that the soul exists...how can the truth
of this statement depend on who says it? I certainly agree that the
understanding of what the statement means depends on who says it, but that's
a different matter. My understanding is that an eternal essence
exists in every human being, whether they believe it or not. The reality of
the soul is objective not subjective. I say objective, but not empirical of
course. By objective reality, I mean something which actually exists
independent of our belief or disbelief.

As to the truth of a proposition depending on a person's stage of spiritual
evolution.....I agree partially. But this idea seems of limited usefulness
because it is very difficult, maybe impossible to know one's own stage of
evolution, much less that of others. Actually, I would rather say that the
*understanding* of the truth of a statement depends on the stage of
spiritual evolution, but metaphysical truth does not depend on anyone's
stage of spiritual evolution. For example, to turn to Baha'u'llah is to
turn to God; to obey Baha'u'llah is to obey God. I say those statements
are true regardless of what anyone believes or disbelieves, regardless of
anyone's stage of evolution. I admit that individuals will differ on the
exact meaning of those statements, because people differ in their
understanding. This is only a truism.

Now, suppose someone else objects to what I just said above, in the
following way:
"Baha'u'llah said 'be a flame of fire to My enemies' (Tablet of Ahmad).
This means we should persecute those who oppose the sacred
teachings. Persecution of those whose views differ from
mine is NOT godly, therefore obeying Baha'u'llah is not equivalent to
obeying God."
That is the supposed objection.
I think the answer to that objection is obvious, so I won't go into it here.
Is this an example of what you mean when you say the truth of a
proposition depends on who says it and on his stage of spiritual evolution.?
Is that what you meant?

you continue:

> We only have a proposition of the following
>sort: "Baha'i X, who has reached such-and-such a spiritual plane,
>perceives Baha'u'llah to be God (in the worlds of Command and >Creation)."
One can add, "Baha'i Y, on the other hand, who subsists on >such-and-such
spiritual plane, perceives the historical Baha'u'llah to be >human

But how is it possible to know, for sure, what spiritual plane another
person has reached? I don't know that even for myself!

In your example, concerning the human or divine nature of Baha'u'llah
....isn't it plain that these observations complement each other, that
neither, by itself, is complete? Each statement is both true and not true.
Is that your point? If so, I agree.

You also say:

> If religion is neither about Right Doctrine nor about Law, then what
>is it about? Baha'u'llah is clear: it is about human acquisition of
>divine perfections.

I find a couple of quotes helpful here:

"The essence of religion is to testify unto that which the Lord hath
revealed, and follow that which He hath ordained in His mighty Book."
-Words of Wisdom

"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. "
-Gleanings

It seems to me that the second purpose, noted above means we cannot
ignore the Law, since the "means" by which "peace and tranquillity"
"can be established" involve obedience to the laws given by the Prophet.
This tension between following the spirit and obeying the Law, is an ancient
problem, as you of course know. Baha'u'llah's principle that neither is
acceptable without the other is the only sensible resolution I know of.

You continue:

> But not every Baha'i is ipso facto more advanced in
>perfection-acquisition than every Chinese >communist.

Yes, of course. The word "Baha'i" for some people is just a label, which
tells little about the person who wears it. Then there are Baha'is who
actually do persevere in trying to live up to the teachings. Of course a
communist or anyone else might be more spiritually advanced than someone who
calls himself Baha'i. After all, "communist" is just a label too. Abdu'l
Baha is reported to have said we should love the light from no matter what
lamp it shines. If the lamp bears the label "communist", that is
insignificant compared to the light that shines from it.

The paradoxical truth is that faith in God, and in the Messenger of God,
is not necesasarily connected with good character. I don't know why this
is so.

with affectionate thoughts,
Tim Nolan tan1@cornell.edu

On 29 April, Steve Scholl posted an excert from an essay by Rosemary
Radford Ruether dealing with the question of how she could justify
staying in the Church when it had a history of profound
institutionalized misogyny, racism, intolerance, support for slavery,
etc. It is a very interesting statement of the sort of heart-searching
that a sincere Christian is undergoing, but I think we must be careful
of transferring its implications wholesale to the Baha'i Faith.

She writes:
> If this is the case, then the ancient "rule of faith"--that what has
> been continuously taught by the church, at least most of the time and
> in most places, is a trustworthy guide to true doctrine--is not so.
> . . .
> However, in the case of the denial of women's full membership in the
> body of Christ, as well as earlier, now more or less discarded
> teachings justifying slavery, racism, and anti-Semitism, we have not
> only corporate institutional abuse of large groups of people, but
> ofcial teaching justifying such abuse. It is claimed to be the will
> of God, to be in accord with the intentions of Christ.Not furtive
> sinners, but serious churchmen--in the full solemnity of
> their teaching ofce--proclaimed, taught, and re-enforced such views,
> not here or there in odd moments of particular crisis, but
> continuously, in some cases over most of the 1,900 years of Christian
> history. Since the mission of the church is to proclaim and promote
> salvation, the salvation made known in Christ, we are also talking
> about a fundamental apostasy to its vocation as the church of Christ.
> If such teachings are records of continuous apostasy, the teaching of error
> and moral evil, then what do we make of the reliability of church
> teaching authority, and the sustaining presence of the Holy Spirit in
> that teaching?

Taking for the moment just the question of the position of women in the
Church, Ruether sharply criticizes the historical record of misogyny in
the church both in term of practice and theory. From this she concludes:

> In my view there are only two options: Either such teachings do
> represent normative Christianity, in which case this is a religion
> that sacralizes evil,and we should get out of it posthaste. Or else
> prophetic truth and justice is preserved in biblical and Christian
> history more in the minority communities andthe critical edges of the
> Christian churches than in the mainstream. This does not mean that an
> idea is true simply because it is a minority opinion. But we must
> give up the long-held assumption that the majority tradition has
> a guaranteed likelihood to be right.

I am not certain that Baha'is would go along with such an analysis. If
we take seriously Abdu'l-Baha's assertion that the Baha'i dispensation
is the first one in which the equality of men and women has been
authoritatively asserted, then it may be that in fact, those teachings
proclaimed by the Apostles and Church fathers that today, looking
backwards, appear to us hopelessly misogynistic do, from a Baha'i
standpoint, "represent normative Christianity."

In case I am misunderstood, I would hasten to add that I do not think
that Jesus Christ purposefully taught misogyny as a part of
Christianity. Rather what I am trying to say is that the equality of
men and women was a part of human evolution that could not be achieved
in Christ's time and therefore Christ allowed the inequality to
continue by not specifically advancing teaching that would promote
equality. A similar analysis could be made about slavery.

In brief, I think we must guard against looking backwards at the
history of religion and making judgements based on today's social and
ethical criteria. Much the same sort of inapproapriate judgement of
Islam goes on in the Christian West all the time of course.

The Baha'i belief in progressive revelation does not involve looking at
religions as they present themselves today and making judgements about their
teachings using today's social and ethical standards. Much as it may
pain scholars in the liberal tradition, it seems to me that the Baha'i
teachings imply that God in fact permitted such social phenomena as a
lower social status for women and slavery in past ages, and such
permission is in fact reflected in the scriptures of past religions.

Having said all that, I think Steve is right in pointing out Ruether's
"ability to stand firm within her faith despite the painful recognition
of the Church's deep problems (theological, social, legal,etc.)" and
stating "for those of us who have difficulties with the status quo of
the Bahai Faith, there is a lesson to be learned from her firmness."

Moojan

--
Wendi and Moojan Momen
momen@northill.demon.co.uk
Fax: (44) 1767 627626

To: talisman@indiana.edu
Cc:
Bcc:
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
Subject: youth and scholarship
Date: Tuesday, May 30, 1995 6:18:01 EZT
Attach:
Certify: N
Forwarded by:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Friends,
Many of you know I spend many of my week-ends teaching a youth class
at our Omaha Bahai Academy.
This past weekend one of my students died. His name is Salmon
Deloughery. He would have been 14 in a couple of weeks . His heart and lungs
gave out following several hours of reconstuctive heart surgery.
This a net dedicated to scholarship so that is why I wanted to
mention Salmon to all of you. He was not only a joy to be around as a person
, but also a young scholar in the making . He asked penetrating questions,
had a zest for understanding the Revelation, and contributed insights unusual
for someone of his age . At least in my experience he was unusual .
Salmon at 13 was very interested in boilogy and cosmology. He had a
scientists mind and a mystics heart. If ever I had a prize pupil he was it .
Here was a boy who was enthralled with Darwin and evolution and found no
conflict between scientific accounts of the development of species and the
meaning of that development as described by Abdu'l Baha. We would talk of
David Bohm's implicate order , he beginning of time all as manifestations of
the descent of the ONE to the Many. Science for him was about the exploration
of the manner in which spirit wove it's tale in physical form. Religion was
about what all this meant and how we could live in harmony with it . He spoke
of being an astronaut and exploring the universe and when I told him if
Baha'u'llah quoting Rumi on the universe being enfolded within us, his eyes
lite up and there was that mystics recognition of the universe within and
without. He thought a moment and concluded that perhaps one day we will all
become spiritual astronauts as well .
The last time I saw Salmon he came to me quietly and handed me a small
present and said " my mom says I am to give you this gift because you are my
teacher." We just sat in our classroom for a while with our arms around
each other . The gift was a package of napkins embroidered with tulips. I
explained to him tulips are the flower of sacrifice and martyrdom . HE looked
at me with his huge bright eyes , ran his hand through his red hair and
thought for a moment , smiled and nodded his head. I would like to think his
life and death will be a sacrifice for Baha'i scholarship. In all my years of
teaching classes I think that one small act was as meaningful to me as
anything I have experienced . I -- was his teacher. Whew !
I guess my telling you all this is my way of dealing with the loss and
because I think of so many of you as family. Salmon was a great kid ! And I
am giong to miss him !
love ,
Terry

On Sun, 21 May 1995, Michael R. Ranjbar wrote:

(quoting the Master)
> "... for when the motivating and guiding power is the divine
> force of MAGNETISM, it is possible, by its aid, to traverse time and
> space easily and swiftly."

> Here it seems clear to me that Abdu'l-Baha has literally named the
> force that will be involved in both space and time travel.
> ... I can say with
> certainty in my heart that magnetism is somehow implicated in
> space in time travel, this would most assuredly spare me years of
> dogged research and allow me to make a jump mentally that could
> yield great fruits in the field of science.

I wholeheartedly agree, both with the underlying principle of accepting
the Prophet's and the Interpreter's words wholeheartedly as our first
response to them, and this particular application of that principle.

The more I reflect on the nature of "empty space" the more convinced I am
that there is an undiscovered reality out there. Yes, I am returning to
the subject of the ether, but just briefly enough to say this. In His
Tablets in BWF the Master says that light and heat and *magnetism* are the
"waves of the ether." Now, science accepts that "empty space" is not
really empty; obviously there are FORCES in space; these forces operate,
for example, to create the tides on the earth, etc. What are these
forces? We are speaking of gravity, which to me is one example of the
"magnetism" the Master speaks of as a wave that is an attribute of the
ether.

I, too, am not an optical scientist, nor a geophysicist. But I am an
intelligent human being, and I can look at my universe and can say, "We
don't know everything about this place." All it took was some
understanding of previously invisible and unknown forces, to invent radio
and laserdiscs and microwave dinners.

One day, a scientist will take another look at the above quote; a
scientist with information sufficient to DO something with the direction
the Master here is pointing. Then, in time, when the nature of the ether
and the waves of that ether are understood, structures will be invented,
which will cancel the effect of undesired magnetic forces, and limit the
influence on the space craft to the star or planet emitting the magnetic
forces which the craft wishes to follow; and fantastic speeds will be
attained. That's my theory of how it will happen, anyhow. In any case,
we will not advance scientifically until we understand what light is (we
still accept the dichotomy that "sometimes it acts like a wave and
sometimes like a particle" -- not recognizing that implicitly this means
we don't know what it IS), and what gravity is, and what medium they flow
through. When we do, we will be able to manipulate these forces.

If we take the view that whenever the Revelation or the authorized
Interpretations are at variance with settled scientific views, then the
Revelation is "superstition" and must defer to science, then we are saying
that we cannot, through the eyes of the Revelator, see beyond today's
science. We cannot be progressive, nor can the Prophet lead science to
higher levels.

While I'm on the topic of the relation between science and revelation,
Juan and others have made compelling statements about how the domain of
the Revelation is the spirit of man, not the realm of science, and we
should simply not permit the Faith to revisit the conflicts of past
Dispensations. But this begs the question: Who decides what is science?

I recall meeting Emeric and Rosemary Sala at Bosch. Emeric smiled -- they
were a dear couple -- and said, "I would like to tell you the secret of 50
years of happy marriage. We decided early on that I would make all the
big decisions, and she would make all the small decisions.... Fifty years
of marriage -- and no big decisions!"

So, who gets to make the big decisions? Who decides what is the realm of
science? Is psychology off limits to the Revelation? Medicine? I feel
that Baha'u'llah's Revelation has many teachings that directly impact on
these sciences. So what I'm saying is, how can we say that He is limiting
what I might term the dominance of His teachings over human endeavors, to
non-scientific matters?

But I have another problem with even describing science and revelation as
separate domains. The Master says on page 368 or 369 of BWF that the
person who cuts away all things and turns with his whole heart to the Holy
Spirit -- that Spirit will make him "competent in science." To me this
implies that the scientist, no less than the mystic, is inspired by the
Holy Spirit. The atheist psychologist who clearly and soundly advises his
or her client is animated by the Holy Spirit. Truth comes from the Holy
Spirit; even if the speaker, following the true statements just made, then
denies the existence of such a Spirit. We are all alloys of slumberer and
awakener. I am not sure that we can separate the domains of science and
religion. We may be better off looking for their commonality.

Sometimes I wonder why I'm a lawyer.