Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 08:53:39 +1200
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: Dave10018@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: pulp fiction
My dear quasipumpkinly friend david,
I saw it!
>all jokes are serious.
Yes: I have read these stories of ernest scholars approaching Zen monks to
discuss their dry knowledge and getting a sound whipping for their trouble,
& I think that is very funny too!
travoltingly
Robert
From cfarhoum@osf1.gmu.eduWed Nov 22 14:30:53 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 13:44:03 -0500 (EST)
From: Cheshmak A Farhoumand <cfarhoum@osf1.gmu.edu>
To: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Please do not trash. Re: Peace by 2000? What is that?
Dear Bev and friends, even if you are tempted to delete, please do read
on.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the subject, and i have certainly
gained insights by reading your posting.
i would however like to address a few points if i may, some for
clarification and others as comments.
1.The idea of PEACE BY THE YEAR 2000 is a concept that needs
to be explored. Some Baha'is assert that when Abdul'Baha said by the end
of the century he meant the gregorian calender, others say that is not
what he meant. Anyways, each has a right to their own interpretation i
guess since no body has yet pin pointed exactly what was meant by the comment
2.What do we mean by peace. In peace and conflict studies the
distinction is made between POSITIVE and NEGATIVE peace. Negative peace
being the end of violence, or something that is on paper ie. Cyprus,
whereas positive peace is when there is transformation at all levels of
society that lead to a lasting state of non-violence, usually implying a
transformation of the parties. Clearly, we are NOT going to achieve
positive peace in the next 4 years, but i think we may be on the way to
achieving negative peace and that is an accomplishment of sorts though it
does not stop the pain.
YOu are right that often in the West people tend to sit back and say
"yes, great, there is peace there now" without realizing the impact on the
local people, and believe me as a student of conflict analysis and
resolution i have to often point out to these people that things are a
lot more complicated than they may seem on the surface. Yes, what
happened in South Africa is great but to implement it will take years.
On the other hand, i DO NOT and CAN NOT lose the HOPE and OPTIMISM that i
feel in my heart because it may sound naive but IT IS WHAT GAVE ME THE
CONVICTION TO GO INTO THIS FIELD AND LEARN HOW MY IDEALISM CAN BE
INTEGRATED WITH A DEGREE OF REALISM AND TRANSLATE ITSELF INTO TRANSFORMATION.
Yes, there is corruption, hatred, betrayal, rape, violence etc in this
world, but there is also love, hope, compassion, forgiveness, mercy,
sacrifice etc. Thanks to the media we only hear of the former not the
latter. Did you know the father of one of the Palestinian men who
kidnapped and executed that young Israeli soldier last year recently got
together with the father of the slain soldier? What does it matter?
Well, both had lost a son, both felt pain. One was the father of the
violater the other the father of the victim, but what they shared was the
common feeling of loss and pain. They spoke because they do not want
other parents to feel their pain. THe media devoted two paragraphs to
this and right beside like a whole page on violent things. We need to
look at things not in isolation but hand in hand with their opposite.
3. THe healing message of the Faith. Yes, often Baha'is look at this in
a simplistic way, and it is not so. But, what i am trying to say is that
it is great to have these ideals, but if we do not get out of our little
communities and try to do something about what is going on around us what
is the good. I admire the Salvation Army. I see them in Toronto driving
around in their vans feeding, clothing sheltering the homeless. It is a
band-aid solution and gives temporary comfort, but it is better than
nothing. We should be more involved in our communities and think of ways
we can serve it not for the purpose of PROPAGATION necessarily as for the
purpose of SERVICE TO GOD BY SERVICE TO HUMANITY.
4. Yes, the headlines are depressing and every time i read about the 10
year old boys in Bosnia who had to dig their graves and then stand there
to be shot in it, i cringe. My Baha'i side says i do not, i can not
understand, my conflict resolution side says there is a long history
there that can not be forgotten so quickly and there are conflict
resolution mechanisms such as trak 2 and grass roots work that can get
there and start helping with the healing process and attempt to start a
reconciliation effort. (the institute where i study is exploring ways we
can get involved in the Balkans now that an settlement has been reached,
but we need to move quickly before it falls apart)
5. You speak of choices. i agree with you, but often i speak to people
who feel there are no choices because man is evil, aggressive, wicked,
blood thirsty. Wow, no wonder things can not change. Psychologically
speaking we normally live according to the images we are given, so call a
kid naughty and he will live up to it. maybe it is time for a change of
ATTITUDES in this area. Yes, man can be all those things but he can also
be compassionate, loving, forgiving etc. GIVE HIM A NEW IMAGE AS NOBLE
AND MAYBE HE WILL TRY TO LIVE UP TO IT.
6.You are right, you have to see suffering, and although i have seen
suffering it is perhaps not the same degree as you have experience. I am
young still, give me another 25 years and we will talk then. But
seriously, i was in Slovenia last year and i became friends with a young
girl who was at the refugee camps there . One night, she went to call
her mom in Sarajevo from the post office and i accompanied her there.
THere was a line of like 100 people waiting to call family and see how
they are. I stood there with Sonia for hours with tears in my eyes.
Finally i sat down and wrote a poem because i was so emotion laden. What
did i see in the eyes of the people there? a strange combination of PAIN
and HOPE. it was one of the most touching moments of my life. yes, i
have seen homeless people, sick with sores on their feet. What did i
do? Bought a package of bandages and forced a friend's socks off his
feet so i could give it to this man who was in pain and cold from the
Toronto weather. It was a temporary ban-aid solution but i think we all
felt better in our hearts. i felt his suffering and he felt my sympathy
and love. May not be much but it was also a very touching experience.
i guess this is the thing you speak of when you say you ask yourself if
there is more you could do. i used to carry the weight of the world on
my shoulders. If there was a murder somewhere, a war, a famine, it was
MY FAULT. i did not know why, it is just how i felt. But we can only
try to do the best we can with the resources we have. often our greatest
contribution to this world is just to be the BEST PERSON THAT WE CAN BE.
To polish our mirror and hope it reflects on others. THis is a very
noble thing to do. YOur polished mirror will lead to transformation of
someone else and so on and so on
7. UN conferences: One of the greatest problems with the UN is it has no
enforcing mechanism. But those conferences at least start dialogue and
that is a start.
8. What is missing in the picture of the man you speak of being hit by a
car? Compassion and value of human life. in '89 i was in England
visiting family. I went into London one day for sightseeing. As i got
off the train, i saw a man lying on the bench gripping his heart with
tears in his eyes and reaching out for help. Hundreds of people walked
by and did nothing. As if he was invisible!! i could not believe it.
How could they be like this, so uncaring and cold? All i could remember
is what you see on tv. He was having a heartattack. Loosen the tie,
open his shirt and get help. So, they stopped the train and requested
assistance. A nurse ememrged, an ambulance was called and i hope he made
it, but i will never forget the image of this man gripping his heart,
reaching out with tears in his eyes and people just rushing by. Just as
i a writing this i have tears in my eyes as i did that day, because it
opened up my naive eyes that no, not everyone cares about others in this
world. sigh!
9.No sanctuaries: Yes, inner peace is certainly key to outer peace in
our relations with others etc.
Phew. Sorry to ramble on so. I thank you again for sharing your baggage
with us. here i went and did the same. i understand your pain when you
see suffering and "have to drive by". God do i know that feeling. But
my only consolation is to immerse myself in my studies and hope that one
day equipped with the knowledge gained from the writings and the
knowledge gained by my academic pursuits, i can make a small small
difference in this big big world.
Warmest love and regards,
Your sister in service.
Cheshmak Farhoumand
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comWed Nov 22 23:19:24 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:51:24 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT <derekmc@ix.netcom.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Fwd: Ahmad's theory,Dickie's theory and now The Kepare theory.
More for the the new souls on Talisman
Today I had the opportunity of visiting in Capitola a beautiful seaside
village near Bosch. In the Village is
the Hair Salon Kepare's , Marsha ' Hobbs' Gilpatrick and my wife Sima
'Spray with hose pipe' <Gentle
Talismanians will remember when I wished to converse with the Lady
regarding the spiritual destiny of the
Planet to be discussed at the Mystics Conference, she insisted watering
her newly planted seedlings was
more important and soaked me because I wished to engage her in
meaningful conversation. I have not
forgotten the total lack of support from such types as Langness ,Cole
,Scholl , Barer and others over that
matter> respective Hairdressers work at Kepare's. I shared with them
Dickie's theory. it turns out the Lady
hairdressers have a deeper and more profound understanding of the real
situation. Much to my surprise I
was told that before the'Fall',men had the babies.Hence the loss of
the jolly old ribs, but after all that
'Sin'< what is sin by the way Burl?>, Men started to complain it hurt
too much <child bearing that is>. God
and the Ladies got so fed up with all the whining that the Ladies
decided to have the children instead.Now
the Ladies were already doing everything else anyway and Men promised
to find a new and helpful role if
they didn't have to have the babies.One of my wife's theories < she
has several > and the Kepare
Hairdressers is that Men's only use is to get heavy items down from
high shelves and take out the Trash.
Well it turns out we have not done a very good job of finding a new
role : playing warriors and killing
each other and anybody else in the way does not get any
cookies<biscuits>.or brownie points. Sandie and
Debbie said that they would match their Shears with the chaps at
Dickie's anytime.Personally I would not
mess with them. As I reflected on the sun shining on the windows and
the pleasant relaxing atmosphere,
sipping a Caffee Latte as the Ladies had their hair coiffured. I
thought of Dickie's Barber's shop in Walla
Walla, sawdust and spittoons, razors and short back and sides, with no
doubt the ancient male ritual of boil
lancing. I was going to ask them about Ahmad's theory but the gleam in
my wife's eye , made me be
discreet. I wonder if Burl could combine all three theories into one so
that we can be united on this.
I did ask Sherman for his views ,he was busy trying to do Breakfast
with a gopher to give us of his
wisdom.Except he did say nobody can tickle or cuddle him like the
ladies. Wild Pete just threw more nuts
at me, his Lady friend Unruly Rita also joined in, the deck of the
Bookshop/Cafe looks like a disaster
area. We have a small family of Wild Boar on campus, they were too busy
to offer any ideas, eating apples
and laughing over the mock boar hunt this summer. I shall be posting
about incident later suffice it to
say,it involves grown men falling and breaking water mains in the
middle of the night and getting soaking
wet.Big Macho men jumping into each others arms in fright much to the
amazement of Mr and Mrs Wild
Boar. Kindest Regards Derek Cockshut.
From 72110.2126@compuserve.comWed Nov 22 23:23:45 1995
Date: 22 Nov 95 15:06:17 EST
From: David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com>
To: JRCole@umich.edu
Subject: Appeal Copies
20 November 1995
The Universal House of Justice
The Baha'i World Center
Haifa, Israel
c/o Secretariat@BWC.org
Dear Esteemed Members of the Supreme Body,
Please accept my humble apologies for intruding upon the precious
deliberative time you must give to matters of much more import than
the following one. Also, I extend my most sincere fealty and love
to the Supreme Body, and want you to know that whatever direction
and advice you decide to give in the appeal herein I intend to
follow explicitly.
Five days ago I received the enclosed letter from the U.S. National
Spiritual Assembly, in which they state that I am "obligated to
post a correction" to an E-mail message I wrote to an electronic
discussion group on the Internet (Talisman) on October 1. The
letter states that if I do not post a retraction within two weeks,
my administrative rights will be in jeopardy. I am writing to
appeal this decision. Normally, as called upon in your
Constitution, I would lodge such an appeal through my National
Assembly, but because their deadline of November 28 makes this an
urgent matter, I am simultaneously forwarding the appeal to both
the NSA and the Universal House of Justice.
I feel this decision contravenes the principle of the sacrosanct
nature of the believer's conscience, as outlined in the quote
below, taken from Developing Distinctive Baha'i Communities, pp.
15.2-15.3:
"At one extreme is the case of a believer who is no longer
able to rectify the wrong he has committed--for example when
he has lost his voting rights for marrying without parental
consent and the parents have since died--in such a case the
factor of repentance is particularly important. At the other
extreme is the case of a believer who has been deprived of his
voting rights because the Assembly is convinced by the
evidence that he was guilty of the offense, but who maintains
that, in spite of all appearances to the contrary, he is
innocent. There is no requirement that such a believer admit
guilt before the voting rights can be restored. The believer
must, however, comply with the Assembly's instructions as to
his behavior. In between these extremes are many cases where
the very rectifying of the error can be held to constitute
repentance."
The National Spiritual Assembly has demanded that I retract a
statement to the effect that the Secretary-General of the National
Spiritual Assembly removed my right to pilgrimage in 1988.
However, I continue to believe that the Secretary-General took this
action himself, and that it was later ratified by the National
Spiritual Assembly. Consequently, in their letter to me of
November 8, the NSA obliges me to publicly state something I
believe to be false in order to retain my administrative rights.
Surely, that cannot be an action that any Baha'i Assembly could
condone, for if the clearly-stated principle above applies after
the fact of removal of administrative rights, certainly it applies
as a condition of keeping those same rights.
I believe that the Secretary-General of the National Spiritual
Assembly took this action, without consultation with the other
members of the NSA, because of the following: At the time I
learned of the removal of my pilgrimage rights, Richard Betts, at
whose home in Portugal I was staying while en route to Haifa,
personally called other members of the U.S. NSA and was told that
they knew nothing of the decision. When I appealed the decision of
the National Spiritual Assembly, which forbade me from continuing
my travel to Haifa, The Universal House of Justice overturned it
and allowed me to come to the Holy Land for a three-day visit.
Also, your letter to Mr. Payam Afsharian of 9 September 1992
indicates that the Universal House of Justice did not remove the
pilgrimage rights of the four editors of Dialogue magazine.
Unfortunately, I cannot prove or disprove the assertion that my
right to pilgrimage was removed by both the NSA and the Universal
House of Justice, because I have never seen the relevant documents
that detail the reasons for such removal. I was promised a
letter of explanation when the Secretary-General cabled and then
telephoned me in Portugal en route to Haifa in 1988, but that
letter never came. Because of this confusion, I would respectfully
request that the Universal House of Justice allow me to see any
documents that bear on the case of my pilgrimage rights, just as I
have requested them from the National Spiritual Assembly. If the
National Spiritual Assembly provides me with documentation showing
that the Universal House of Justice removed my right to pilgrimage,
or if the Universal House of Justice informs me that this is the
case, I will certainly withdraw this appeal and immediately issue
the retraction the NSA has directed me to make.
Also, I was not aware that saying something on an Internet forum
could, in any way, jeopardize one's administrative rights. I
understand the Supreme Body has made it clear on several occasions
that speech on such fora is not subject to review.
Again, I sincerely regret taking up the time and energy of the
Supreme Body with this relatively small matter. However, because
it involves what I perceive as an injustice and a profound test of
personal conscience, I do not see how I can do otherwise.
With deepest love,
David Langness
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[Attachment 1 -- copy of my response follows:]
15 November 1995
The National Spiritual Assembly of
The Baha'is of the United States
National Baha'i Center
Wilmette, IL 60091
Dear Co-workers,
I was dismayed and taken aback by your letter of November 8, which
I received on November 14, regarding a posting I sent to the
Talisman Internet network, and would like very much to get to the
bottom of this matter as soon as possible. And I apologize in
advance for anything I may have said that could possibly be
interpreted as disrespect or as undermining the authority of the
National Spiritual Assembly, which I would never knowingly do.
However, I lack the resources to respond to your requirement for a
correction, since I do not keep records of my outgoing
correspondence to Talisman. Would you be so kind as to forward to
me the posting in question? I can certainly address your concerns
as soon as I have the posting in my possession.
I am also concerned that the posting may have been altered in some
way before it reached you. This kind of E-mail alteration has
become common, as pointed out in the front-page article that
coincidentally appeared in the Los Angeles Times this morning,
which I have enclosed. I have no idea who would do such a thing,
but I need to carefully examine the post to make sure the words you
have received are indeed mine.
I would also respectfully request copies of any National Spiritual
Assembly correspondence regarding me and/or the withdrawal of my
pilgrimage rights that took place during the period in question, on
or around the month of May, 1988. These copies will allow me to
understand what actually did transpire during that period,
something I have never fully comprehended, and would be
indispensable in helping me craft the proper response.
Accordingly, I would like to request an extension of your two-week
deadline until after I have received said materials.
While I have on occasion been critical of the National Spiritual
Assembly's policies, I have never "attack"[ed] any Baha'i
institution, nor would I dream of doing so. I have always obeyed
the National Spiritual Assembly explicitly, and cannot imagine
doing otherwise. And you should know that I have read carefully,
over and over, the Universal House of Justice's message on
individual rights and freedoms, and will happily do so again at
your request. I am under the impression from my repeated readings
of that document that the right of the individual to set forth his
views is protected within the Faith.
Please be assured that the deep love I "profess to hold for
Baha'u'llah and His Cause" is in fact real, not professed.
I ask all nine of you in the National Spiritual Assembly's role as
the loving father of the community to forgive me my shortcomings,
of which there are many.
Sincerely,
David Langness
cc: The Universal House of Justice
The Continental Board of Counselors for the Americas
Copyright 1995 David Langness
This letter has been copyrighted to prevent its use without the
express permission of the author.
This letter has been transmitted electronically to USNSA@usbnc.org.
A hard copy transmission VIA registered mail will follow.
From dpeden@imul.comWed Nov 22 23:23:57 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 95 23:27:56+030
From: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>
To: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT <DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.edu>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Peace by 2000? What is that!
Dear Quanta:
Thanks for your reply. You are right. A political peace is such a hollow
thing. There is a saying here in Africa, that when the Elephants fight, the
grass is crushed. I see a lot of crushed grass. You don't have to come
here, however, to see crushed grass. This I know. Thanks for being one of
the ones to see it. There is a lot in North America, and more will be
crushed and cut down before there is any meaningful peace. My comment about
the armchair theorists was not meant to imply that there is no suffering in
U.S. or any other country, or that people there are insensitive to it. I
know better. Sometimes I have a bad day, and I don't think before I put my
mouth in gear. I guess I just get frustrated sometimes, and don't know
where to put it. I'm sure I'm not alone.
I don't have much faith in politics, teaching plans, number games, or any of
the other jargon or intellectual jousting that we humans engage in being a
cause of peace. Is it reasonable to expect a learned "pattern of
behaviour" to be the source of real change. People search for answers
because the environment is right for them to be creative in their
thinking...they come up with solutions to problems in environments of
encouragement and spiritual growth. Until we try and create an environment
of the heart and become all that we can be spiritually, peace just isn't
possible. You can't legislate thinking, feeling or compassion. It can't be
faked. Until there is real change in the hearts of people, change, the kind
we might describe as "peace" is still a long way off. Anything less falls
short.
I remember hearing friends of mine say how the world will end in such and
such a year, and then the year would pass, and then they would come up with
an excuse why it didn't happen, and a new year of prediction, and so on and
so on. Will Baha'is be the same, waiting for Peace in the year 2000?
I don't have much empathy for the suffering I witness. How could I when I
do not know what it is to personally suffer the way they have? That is what
I meant when I said that they had the right to approach Baha'u'llah in his
suffering, not me. Compassion? Yes, I think I do feel compassion...also a
frustration at not being able to alieviate the suffering I witness. There
is too much. All I can do is whatever I can do each day, and in each
circumstance. It will never be enough, but it is something. It has never
particularly mattered to me whether people I help are Baha'is or not. It is
irrelevant.
What will give me hope for peace are people who do what they can, where ever
they can, in whatever manner open to them to respond with love and
compassion to suffering, and to try and make a difference with their
lives...not necessarily their wallets. I don't care if they carry the name
Baha'i or not. Then, perhaps we can talk about peace. It is what the
teachings of Baha'u'llah have brought. This is the medicine, not an
administrative system, or any other social remedies we think we might
understand. They are mere empty forms without the animating spirit of love
and compassion.
I have a lot to learn, which I believe is why I am here. I have learned so
much in Africa, it is what has generated the love I feel for people here.
It is why I am grateful. I have learned the many strengths I have, and try
and use them with wisdom.
Like women who believe themselves victims in North America and other places,
the same attitudes prevail here. Women blame themselves for being victims,
thinking that they did not "behave", and were therefore punished. The
church often adds to this by telling them that they suffer because they are
sinners, it is a guilt trip BIG TIME! People in poverty both men and women,
just accept their lot, and pray that their luck will change. They have their
own ways of exerting feelings of power over others. And they do.
We don't have sufficient systems in the faith for putting our compassion
into practice. Baha'is often say, "but we don't have the resources...we
have to teach to get the resources so we can do something." Sorry, I don't
accept that. This is not a time for linear thinking. These things must
happen simultaneously. Everyone, and every community, can do something, no
matter how small, and it can start right at home. I guess that is what
frustrates me. It's all fine to talk about the "big picture", but what
about the person sitting next to us? Aren't they part of that picture?
I like salt and pepper, thank you. Although I don't go intentionally
looking for them, I accept wounds if they are serving a meaningful
purpose...if they can help me to be kinder, have more humility, glean an
awareness, or to be of service to someone, great. I'll never be able to
close my eyes to the suffering I see...I also can't take over their pain.
Wounded heart? You bet, but at least it bleeds. For this I am grateful. I
would worry if it was pierced and nothing came out.
By the way, I enjoy your poetry. There hasn't been any lately, and I do
miss it.
Love,
Bev.
>Is that me speaking in you? I live in US and do not envy me.
>I know of many converted american sisters in our Faith who have been
>so brutalized by unspeakable horrors from childhood on,
>that one even have the tendency to stab herself out of anger.
>I know of some who were victims of multiple crimes, rape,
>incest, sexual harassment, molestation who either turn their
>anger inward or outward to society. This is no heaven my dear.
>They find no comfort from their fellow believers, for they are
>ashamed of being the victims of these horrors and blame
>themselves. Why did I deserve this? is their painful question.
>I believe it is more painful to suffer in a country that prides
>itself with having so much of everything. It is like suffering
>of Sisyphus of Tantalus without deserving their punishment.
>
>But, I hear and feel your pain and those of others as well.
>Political peace does not have a trickling down effect on the
>millions of innocent people, yet. Think of the champagne
>glass, the top has the most and the bottom practically nothing.
>Trickling down is not enough!
>
>Baha'is are in a state of empathy, not compassion. I have not seen any
descripti
>on
> in the prayers which says "O Thou Most Empathizer!" It is always "The Most
Compassionate!"
>Do we understand the difference? In my experiences, NO!!
>This is what I have been told by two young men from India and
>Costa Rica who have relatives and close associates as Baha'is,
>"Baha'is are good at intellectual stuff, but I don't see them
>full of love and compassion for others". Although, they like
>the "ideas" they decided to become Christians instead, where
>they found more caring and a place where they also could
>systematically and individually put their compassion to work.
>
>I am sorry, if I added more salt and pepper to your wounded heart.
>Please forgive me.
>
>lovingly,
>quanta...(*_*)
>
>
>
From jjensen@welchlink.welch.jhu.eduWed Nov 22 23:24:22 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:38:17 -0500 (EST)
From: Joan Jensen <jjensen@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
To: SFotos@eworld.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: planes of discourse
On Tue, 21 Nov 1995 SFotos@eworld.com wrote:
> The virtues of the far are the sins of the near.
> Does anyone know the source? This statement would imply a developmental
> continuum where similar validity options exists.
Dear Sandy,
In _Some Answered Questions_, page 126, 'Abdu'l-Baha states:
"The good deeds of the righteous are the sins of the Near Ones."
Looking at this quotation in context, I also agree that it supports
Juan's thesis on standpoint epistemology.
This is the essay where 'Abdu'-Baha is asked the question:
"What is the truth of the story of Adam, and His eating of the fruit
of the tree?" (running from page 122-126). In the concluding paragraph
to this essay, 'Abdu'l-Baha says:
".... Adam is the spirit of Adam, and Eve is His soul: the
tree is the human world, and the serpent is that attachment
to this world which constitutes sin, and which has infected
the descendants of Adam. Christ by His holy breezes saved
men from this attachment and freed them from this sin. The
sin in Adam is relative to His position. Although from this
attachment there proceed results, nevertheless, attachment
to the earthly world, in relation to attachment to the
spiritual world, is considered as a sin. The good deeds of
the righteous are the sins of the Near Ones. This is
established. So bodily power is not only defective in
relation to spiritual power; it is weakness in comparison.
In the same way, physical life, in comparison with eternal
life in the Kingdom, is considered as death. So Christ
called the physical life death, and said: "Let the dead
bury their dead." (Matthew 8:22). Though those souls
possessed physical life, yet in His eyes that life was death.
This one of the meanings of the bibilical story of
Adam. Reflect until you discover the others.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joan Jensen
Baltimore, Maryland USA
<jjensen@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
*******************************************************************
"...love and affinity are the fruits of a gentle disposition,
a pure nature and praiseworthy character..."
Selected Writings of 'Abdu'l-Baha, p. 287
*******************************************************************
From burlb@bmi.netWed Nov 22 23:24:41 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 95 12:01 PST
From: Burl Barer <burlb@bmi.net>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Peace by 2000
I find the following quote from the Universal House of Justice, dated May
19th, 1994, of paramount importance:
"At this exact time in history when the peoples of the world are weighed
down with soul-crushing difficulties and the shadow of despair threatens to
eclipse the light of hope, there must be revived among the individual
believers a sense of mission, a feeling of empowerment to minister to the
urgent need of humanity for guidance and thus to win victories for the Faith
in their own sphere of life. The community as a whole should be involved in
efforts to resolve such issues."
This is really, as Frank Zappa would say, "the crux of the bisquit" -- the
call is to transform ourselves and our communities to the point of
consecrated and continued action.
Burl
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From dpeden@imul.comWed Nov 22 23:24:50 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 95 23:48:05+030
From: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>
To: Cheshmak A Farhoumand <cfarhoum@osf1.gmu.edu>
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Peace 2000
Dear Cheshmak:
Thank you for your comments. From what I am hearing you say, there is good
basis for talk about peace. I have no doubt that if there is a "front line"
in the push for peace, you will be on it. I feel happy about that.
I do look forward to your comments. And, yes, you are right. Many people,
including myself, really don't understand all the implications of what
current events mean. It sounds good, but man! Is there a long road to haul
before we have peace! By saying Mandela is now president, you sure don't
sweep years of racial hatred and resentment under the carpet. We have
access to South African television, and there are a few programs which look
at events and concerns in South Africa. They show a fair amount of both
positive and negative concerns. It is very interesting to see what kind of
community dynamics are now starting to emerge. Some of it is positive, some
of it is pretty scary stuff.
Like you, it is the small, everyday gestures and outreachings which keep me
going. Thanks for sharing yours...
Love,
Bev.
P.S. Rather than delete, I think I'd rather study your comments further.
From belove@sover.netWed Nov 22 23:26:05 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 95 15:03:37 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: "Mark A. Foster" <mfoster@tyrell.net>, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Both/and thinking
On Wed, 22 Nov 1995 08:35:46 -0600 (CST) Mark A. Foster wrote:
> Your assumption seems to be that Juan's model is the correct
one,
>and that anyone who would oppose it must have a hidden motivation.
In my
>case, that is certainly not the case. However, if I have
misrepresented
>a particular position, which was certainly not my intention, I
welcome
>corrections.
>
Actually, Mark, I do think your model is a possible one. But I think
it complicates matters so much that I don't understand why you like
it. I think the best model is one that clarifies and that's you
farthest fastest. But , as my signature says, models can oversimplify
and do violence to that which they propose to map.
So I assume that, if you prefer a model which, by comparison, to me,
seems cumbersome and lacks the ability to clarify , then you must be
holding onto it in order to protect a an important nuance, something
that would otherwise be lost or not mapped.
Rather than call that a "hidden motivation" I would call it a "not
yet articulated reason." Hence my question. This is not an ad
hominem arguement. It is an attempt to on my part to clarify, for my
self your position. Although, I do admit that from my limited
understanding, I can't see why you prefer what you prefer.
> What I think should be obvious is that Baha'i academics do not
agree
>on these matters. There is no *consensus* on this, and many other,
>issues - which, it seems to me, has sometimes been assumed on this
>forum. Actually, the only thing that I "want to gain intellectually"
is
>a fuller sharing of diverse perspectives. I believe that we are
taught
>that it is only "by the clash of differing opinions" that truth is
>revealed.
>
>B >this both/and business and this nesting of heirarchies undoes the
>B >whole concept of standpoint epistemology and also undoes the idea
of
>B >separate language games or separate semiotics. I don't find any
>B >virtue in it.
>
> As I see it, we are only talking about words. Knowledge is not
>fixed, and, honestly, I doubt that I have the ability to undermine
>anything. My desire is to share my own perspectives on reality. Are
you
>suggesting that we should all simply accept whatever views are put
>forward on Talisman without questioning them?
No, Mark, I really think we are talkingabout more than "only"
"words." I think we are in disagreement over conceptual schema. And
it really is possible, with one conceptual schema to undermine, undo,
or make invisible important distinctions in another.
>B >Even when you have a nested heirarchies of language games, as in
>B >geometries and mathematics, you still have local languages in
which
>B >statements true in one language (parallel lines never meet) are
>B >untrue in another language (Parallel lines on a sphere may either
>B >meet or not meet depending on their size relative to that of the
>B >equator).
>
> Yes. That is true, which is why I said that we need to develop a
new
>discourse which will integrate all of these approaches. To me, it is
an
>essential element of the Baha'i metaphysic of unity in diversity.
Yes, here , at the close, we do agree. Juan, seems to be saying that
Baha'ullah's description of standpoint epistemology might provide the
framework for a discourse to integrate all these approaches.
The difficulty you and I seem to be having in talking about this
material is a difficulty of logical typing. We are talking to each
other at separate logical levels of discourse.
Well, enough for a coffee break. I am enjoying this and hope you are
as well
Philip
>
>Warm greetings to you,
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzWed Nov 22 23:26:18 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 10:14:34 +1200
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: belove@sover.net, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Socrates hitched his wagon to a Star
Dear Philip,
>But Chris is right within a certain language game or semiotic. Robert
>in another.
Unlike Socrates, who hitched his wagon to a Star, the sophists were
relativists. They were different. The sophists couldn't understand
Socrates. Thus he was put to death.
In my view, then, it it possible to be quite simply wrong about things.
Robert.
From richs@microsoft.comWed Nov 22 23:26:30 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:26:06 -0800
From: richs@microsoft.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu, derekmc@ix.netcom.com
Subject: RE: Fwd: Ahmad's Theory/Dickie's Theory
Good Grief! Now we're back at the Barber Shop. To
quote Charlie Brown, "Arrrgh!"
This would be much more tolerable if I weren't in
such dire need of a haircut.
Warmest Regards,
Rick Schaut (who must go fulfill his promise to
scrub the floors before our guests appear for
Thanksgiving dinner)
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzWed Nov 22 23:26:47 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 10:26:36 +1200
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Socrates
Dear John.
>May I now claim vindication on the Socrates issue? They cited the same
>secondary sources as I was using.
(1) Sir, methinks your plea for vindication lacks adequate articulation!
(2) If you are suggesting that the letter did not uphold the view that
Socrates went to the Holy Land, then I believe you are manifestly mistaken.
The letter clearly upheld the view that Socrates went. It was also stated
that the actual source (historical and apart from intuitive insight) of
'Abdu'l-Baha's knowledge of this fact was not known.
Robert.
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comWed Nov 22 23:27:07 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 13:41:27 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT <derekmc@ix.netcom.com>
To: burlb@bmi.net
Subject: Private messages and Hose,
My dear Burl
I am very confused how is it our private E;Mails are getting on to Talisman and to
Linda ? We did discuss by phone , fax and E'Mail HOSE . but that was between you
and I . It seems to me powerful , influential and secret forces are at work here . I
mean when two chaps private nay sacred words are being spied on what are we to do.
The launch of HOSE could be ruined if the news continues to get out like this. As we
both said this would be bigger than the Beatles reunion and Album release .
I notice that Linda is still trying to convince everyone that nothing happened in jolly
old Philly. I heard there was several heart problems after her activities at the Cassock
twirling contest . I mean flashing red and black lace at those Archbishops drove them
wild it did . Caused a near riot especially when the Dominican Abbot demanded the
contestants do cartwheels after Linda's performance , no wonder she got
disqualified. In regard to what were John and Juan doing in Ann Arbor . Well young
lady I would tell her they , as good academic historians will do , carried out a serious
field dig on the relationship of leather to the enfoldment of civilization in the
Mesozoic era . As you may know Burl this is vital in understanding the development
of Grecian Philosophy especially in how it relates to Kranese in both language and
literature . Further to that Juan's young female leather clad twins of ABS fame , well
acquainted with you my dear friend , came along to assist in giving a modern slant
on this research . Apparently John due to this has become a real hero in his son's
eyes who now does want to be just like Dad and good old uncle Juan . He keeps
muttering something about Babes and Academia is this the name of Linda's
forthcoming book ? So I believe it was a totally unwarranted attack on the integrity of
dear John our steamed list owner and his dear friend and ours in suppression Juan .
To imagine they would not be anything else but their normal boring , dull , taciturn
, stoic and recusant selves is unthinkable . Sherman is most concerned about John and
not all concerned about Ahmad . The message from Sherman for Ahmad is that the
Ladies always get you in the end and the best therapy to overcome the Seed of
Creation is two gophers and a quail a day. I will post that one later on Talisman .
Linda would have won by the way the arm wrestling contest but she got into a
shouting match with a Southern Baptists over the Pope and lost her concentration .
So Burl how are our private messages going out on Talisman.
Warmest Regards
Derek
From mfoster@tyrell.netWed Nov 22 23:28:43 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 17:24:04 -0600 (CST)
From: "Mark A. Foster" <mfoster@tyrell.net>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Both/and thinking
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Hi, Philip -
Thanks for your message. ;-)
You wrote:
B >Actually, Mark, I do think your model is a possible one. But I think
B >it complicates matters so much that I don't understand why you like
B >it. I think the best model is one that clarifies and that's you
B >farthest fastest. But , as my signature says, models can oversimplify
B >and do violence to that which they propose to map.
How do you think that it complicate matters? To my understanding,
the "both-and" approach is an extention of what I have called the Baha'i
metaphysic of unity in diversity. If we can lift up our visions to see
with God's eyes (i.e., from the POV of the divine teachings), we will, I
think, begin to perceive all created things as emanations from the
Manifestation of the Unity of God. To me, that is the essence of
simplicity.
While one's vision will differ relative to one's vantage point,
since those on a higher level can see that which lies below (but not the
other way around), if we train our human spirits, through the assistance
of the spirit of faith, to see existence from the overall perspective (a
God's-eye viewpoint), then everything else will fall into place. To me,
it is an important distinction, since it potentially impacts one's
assumptive framework and whether one attempts to compartmentalize the
various levels of perception.
However, the approach I have suggested will, I think, require more
critical thought. It assumes that there are certain features of modern
science, and scholarship in all areas (especially the social and
behavioral sciences) which require modification. Being at the leading
edge of a revolution in "normal science" (Kuhn) is never easy.
B >So I assume that, if you prefer a model which, by comparison, to me,
B >seems cumbersome and lacks the ability to clarify , then you must be
B >holding onto it in order to protect a an important nuance, something
B >that would otherwise be lost or not mapped.
I don't think that it is cumbersome - only challenging. It is almost
always *easier* not to go against the tide, so to speak. However, I feel
that Baha'is are being asked to challenge traditional ways of doing
things and *not to necessarily* accept the popular wisdom.
B >Rather than call that a "hidden motivation" I would call it a "not
B >yet articulated reason." Hence my question. This is not an ad
B >hominem arguement. It is an attempt to on my part to clarify, for my
B >self your position. Although, I do admit that from my limited
B >understanding, I can't see why you prefer what you prefer.
In all honesty, my reason is to do what I believe my Lord requires
of me. That is it. I feel that we have been called by the Master, the
Guardian, and the Universal House of Justice to attempt spiritual
revolutions in our respective fields - especially in academic ones.
Although I have, with only one exception (and that was outside of
class) never mentioned that I am a Baha'i to any of my students (while
they were my students), I *do* express my general perspective on
reality. For instance, I will, in my social problems class, sometimes
refer to the need for social synthesis, and sometimes ask my students to
come up with ways of creatively resolving social problems (especially
those which involve oppression of some sort) using the principle of
unity in diversity.
B >No, Mark, I really think we are talking about more than "only"
B >"words." I think we are in disagreement over conceptual schema. And
B >it really is possible, with one conceptual schema to undermine, undo,
B >or make invisible important distinctions in another.
OK. But, IMV, conceptual schema are word maps. From my perspective,
most present-day theories (at least in my field) are inadequate.
Although I find more that is of use in structuralism, Marxism, and
integralism (Pitirim Sorokin) than in some other analytical models, I
recognize the deficiencies of those frameworks as well.
B >The difficulty you and I seem to be having in talking about this
B >material is a difficulty of logical typing. We are talking to each
B >other at separate logical levels of discourse.
I agree, Philip. We are speaking from somewhat different
standpoints. However, I think that even this difficulty can, with
patience, be overcome.
B >Well, enough for a coffee break. I am enjoying this and hope you are
B >as well
Yes. Very much, Philip. Tnx <g>.
With loving regards to you,
Mark
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comWed Nov 22 23:28:53 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:47:55 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT <derekmc@ix.netcom.com>
To: ahmada@acsusn.acsu.edu.au
Subject: Effects on Sherman an answer for Ahmad
We have noted the various comments of our dear hidden friend Ahmad. I am ordered
by Sherman to inform you you need to try his famous recipe yourself. As far Ladies
are concerned I am on December 8th through the 10th conducting a class on
Relationships here at the Bosch Baha'i School in Santa Cruz California . So far the
Ladies out number the men by 6.5 to 1. 28 people enrolled so far . So Ahmad come to
Bosch that weekend there are 23 lovely ladies at least in the class I am running .
Normally bookings increase by 50% over the last 2 weeks . So we should have a
group of at least 42 people , 34 being Ladies . So desperate unmarried Ahmad come to
the jolly old USA for the weekend
I promise as your teacher not to reveal your true identity as the 'villainous scounderel'
Ahmad 'The Seed' Annis to the class .You wiil of course as is required of all my
students if you find someone you wish to marry have to obtain my consent, once you
have been a student of mine.
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzWed Nov 22 23:35:11 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:44:36 -0900
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT <DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.edu>, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: intuition, compassion, "intellectual stuff"...
talismaidenic Quanta wrote:
>Baha'is are in a state of empathy, not compassion. I have not seen any
>description
> in the prayers which says "O Thou Most Empathizer!" It is always "The
>Most Compassionate!"
>Do we understand the difference? In my experiences, NO!!
>This is what I have been told by two young men from India and
>Costa Rica who have relatives and close associates as Baha'is,
>"Baha'is are good at intellectual stuff, but I don't see them
>full of love and compassion for others". Although, they like
>the "ideas" they decided to become Christians instead, where
>they found more caring and a place where they also could
>systematically and individually put their compassion to work.
Some notes:
(1) The body of Christendom wasn't torn apart by an excess of compassion.
(That's what I would tell these two young men!)
(2) Is it not possible that there is a shorter distance between empathy and
compassion than there is between "intellectual stuff" and empathy..?
However, it would seem to me that if this is clearly true it may be only
because "intellectual stuff" is much less than a genuinely scientific
presence.
(3) Should we not strive to acquire intelligent and understanding hearts?
Do you not think we should try to realise the true unity science and
love..?
(4) True empathy is wonderously scientific, entailing complete
identification with the object of perception. Without this kind of
understanding how is genuine compassion possible?
love,
Robert.
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzWed Nov 22 23:35:20 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:52:45 -0900
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT <DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.edu>, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: trumatic effects on Sherman
Ffolks,
For a uniquely funny and poignant letter I highly recommend Quanta's
reponse to Ahmad... [David: it is straight from William Saroyan or V.S.
Naipaul] It is a beautiful letter, and I wish I could read more like it.
Robert.
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:18:54 -0800
From: an assistant to the auxiliary board
To: jrcole@umich.edu
Subject: RE: Re: Baha'i Bill of Rights/criminal code
Dear Juan,
From: Juan R Cole[SMTP:jrcole@umich.edu]
>Basically, as things now stand no Baha'i can ever know when they might be
>breaking the law. For all I know, it may be illegal to complain about
>the lack of codified human rights law in the Faith, or it may be illegal
>to say that NSAs have in some instances acted arbitrarily and have not
>been overturned by the House. (This is certainly the case, and I can
>document it if challenged; the question is whether I can say it).
I respectfully submit that _now_ is the time for you to
produce that objective definition by which we might
determine that a decision has been arbitrary and for
which I've asked numerous times. Without that
definition, your conclusion that any decision is, indeed,
arbitrary is itself an arbitrary decision.
If the best you can do is pit your own arbitrary
conclusions against those of a National Spiritual
Assembly, then it's not good enough.
Secondly, I think you've missed a possibility: that an
Assembly can make the right decision for the wrong
reasons. Such a case is likely to produce a strong letter
from the Universal House of Justice to the Assembly, but
not a change in the status of the individual's voting rights.
Unlike the US system of governance, a technical failure
on the part of a lower institution does not automatically
produce a reversal of that institution's decision.
I am _very_ strongly inclined to believe that instances where
an appeal is based upon individual, subjective opinion, and
not on a clear understanding of the principles of which
govern the application of Baha'i law, are quite likely to fall
into this category. Because these kinds of cases can, and
do exist, I still conclude that the correct course of action
for an individual who doesn't trust the decision of an
Assembly is to consult with a member of the Continental
Board of Counselors.
As a closing note: you earlier claimed that Counselors
are inclined not to make waves because they are
concerned about being reappointed. I should, at this time,
point out that this assertion has been made without
supporting evidence and speaks to the motives of these
people. In concert, these combine to render this
assertion useless.
Warmest Regards,
From SFotos@eworld.comThu Nov 23 00:12:51 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 19:14:59 -0800
From: SFotos@eworld.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Intercultural communication and SE
Dear Talismans,
Different people have been commenting on Standpoint Epistemology (SE) from
the perspective of their fields and I would like to share some thoughts on
the topic as it exists in applied/sociolinguistics.
The deterministic argument that the language we speak controls how we think
was overthrown in the 60s by the work of Chomsky on universal grammar
(demonstrating that the human brain is hardwired to learn languages, and has
pre-existing parameters which are then "set" according to the language
learned), and also by research on multilinguals, who appear to have a
cognitive edge over monolinguals. The current view resonates well with SE:
Language, though and culture are interrelated and it is not possible to say
which is more influential. They shape us and we, in turn, shape them through
the permanence of the written word.
As a result of this view, two areas are now very hot: contact linguistics,
which studies language use/alternation in multilingual urban areas, and
intercultural communications. This last field is not only important
academically, but commercially, too. There are many institutes offering
training in intercultural communication, much of it geared to North American
businessmen who work in Asia. I've heard of centers which charge as much as
$2,000 for a weekend of intercultural consciousness raising.
Several findings here fit in well with discussions on Talisman. One is the
point that interpretation of phenomena depends on the cultural viewpoint of
the person. For example, in Japan, listeners nod when you are speaking, but
this does not necessarily indicate agreement. Rather, it means "I hear you
and understand your view." In the west, we interpret this to mean that the
interlocutor agrees with what we've said. You can imagine what problems this
one miscommunication has caused at the conference table!!!
Another point concerns emotions. Researchers agree that there are
fundamental emotions which are innate and part of the genetic code: love,
joy, surprise, sadness, anger, disgust, contempt, fear and interest. But
other emotions are culturally dependent, for example, shame and guilt. The
implication is that we must not assume that people from different cultures
feel the same way about things that we do.
Stephen Hawking evokes an image of countless universes arising like soap
bubbles from a stream of physical reality. Going with this image and
extending concepts from intercultural communication theory, I can imagine
many life forms on different planets, each with their own Manifestations and
their own languages, expressed through motion, color, sound waves, chemical
exudates, whatever. Obviously, "meaning" will be very situationally
dependent. But there will still be universals. The various Manifestations
will speak to both the universals and the needs of the particular situation.
Perhaps, in the physical universe, the end of God's Great Plan will be the
universal acknowledgment that "Creation is One."
I'd better end this overly-long post..
Best,
Sandy Fotos <sfotos@eworld.com>
Tokyo, Japan
From dpeden@imul.comThu Nov 23 00:12:56 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 95 06:19:04+030
From: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Peace to Burl
Thanks Burl. That is a quote I'll pin close to my heart for a talisman.
Love,
Bev.
From JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduThu Nov 23 00:13:08 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 95 22:41:49 EWT
From: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Good deeds
"The good deeds of the righteous are the sins of the Near Ones." is a
popular Islamic proverb. It was once quoted to me by an Ayatollah
whom I was trying to recruit for a project that I knew he privately
supported but that was tainted by association with the Faith.
john walbridge
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzThu Nov 23 01:22:40 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 18:47:52 +1200
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Peace by 2000? What is that!
Dear Bev,
If you are not keeping copies of your letters, then I hope Eric's
got them safely tucked away. I simply do not know how you manage to write
so much with such fluency and colour. Historians of the future will use
the letters/record, surely, and, in the meantime, if your painting muse
ever deserts you, you could write a smashing book...
If what I am saying detracts attention from the seriousness of your "Peace
by 2000? What is that!" letter, then I am sorry.
from the temperate zone,
Robert.
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comThu Nov 23 01:22:57 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 21:39:05 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT <derekmc@ix.netcom.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Teaching Story.
My dear Talismanians
Today one of my year of service students made a choice to stay
at Bosch until June of next year. Eric <Horton> really had
problems with this ,he prayed and meditated for guidance and
decided to stay because of the teaching opportunies. However as
he used my Computor to send off the message he was staying here
. He still wondered if he had made the right choice . He then
walked off to fetch the school mail from our postbox . As he
reached the school entrance . He was stopped by a young man .
Who said are you part of the Baha'i Faith , to which Eric
replied Yes .Well I think I want to become a Baha'i can you help
me please ?
Eric has taken the young man to his first Feast tonight in Santa
Cruz City. The young man is called Leonard and orginally is from
Detroit he is twenty years old . I think it is a wonderful
confirmation of Eric's service . The time for rapid entry
approaches my friends I promise you.
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
From cfarhoum@osf1.gmu.eduThu Nov 23 01:29:50 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 01:25:28 -0500 (EST)
From: Cheshmak A Farhoumand <cfarhoum@osf1.gmu.edu>
To: Bahai-discuss@bcca.org
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu, peace@csf.colorado.edu, icar@gmu.edu, mug@gmu.edu,
crews@csf.colorado.edu, bubba@gwis.circ.gwu.edu, rgoldberg@vms1.gmu.edu,
mgopin@gmu.edu, ljgroff@dhvx20.csudu.edu, psmoker@college.antioch.edu,
whall1@gmu.edu, iking2nsf.gov@osf1.gmu.edu
Subject: Thanksgiving wishes!!
To all my dear friends old and new, near and far ...
Greetings! As we gather together with family and friends this weekend, i
wish you all a very blessed and happy Thanksgiving, and i pray that the
years to come will fill your lives with many things to be grateful for.
i also ask that as we gather this weekend to celebrate we think about the
things which we are blessed with and remember those who are not as
fortunate as we are. Not only to think about them, but rather to think
of ways we can as individuals, families, and communities share with them
some part of our lives that will give them something to be grateful for also.
Warmest Regards,
Cheshmak Farhoumand
"Be generous in prosperity, and thankful in adversity. Be worthy of the
trust of thy neighbour and look upon him with a bright and friendly face.
Be a treasure to the poor, an admonisher to the rich, an answerer of the
cry of the needy, a preserver of the sanctity of thy pledge. Be fair in
thy judgment and guarded in thy speech. Be unjust to no man and show all
meekness to all men. Be a lamp unto them that walk in darkness, a joy to
the sorrowful, a sea for the thirsty, a haven for the distressed, an
upholder and defender of the victim of oppression. Let integrity and
uprightness distinguish all thine acts. Be a home for the stranger, a
balm to the suffering, a tower of strength for the fugitive. Be eyes to
the blind, and a guiding light unto the feet of the erring. Be an ornament
to the coutnenance of truth, a crown to the brow of fidelity, a pillar of
the temple of righteousness, a breath of life to the body of mankind, an
ensign of the hosts of justice, a luminary above the horizon of virtue, a
dew to the soil of the human heart, an ark on the ocean of knowledge, a
sun in the heaven of bounty, a gem on the diadem of wisdom, a shining
light in the firmament of thy generation, a fruit upon the tree of
humility."
Baha'u'llah
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduThu Nov 23 01:30:24 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 23:25:15 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]" <gpoirier@acca.nmsu.edu>
To: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Baha'i Bill of Rights/criminal code
On Thu, 23 Nov 1995, Robert Johnston wrote:
> Obviously Baha'i law
> would stem from the Aqdas, which is -- jurisprudentially speaking -- brief
> and to the point.
> Globally speaking, the elimination of contending legal systems would surely
> have advantages similar to the establishment of a universal language.
> Simplicity again.
The underlying assumptions of the legal systems result in radically
different structures; just as the differing shapes of the specks of dust
onto which water condenses, results in the different shapes of the
snowflakes built on them. The six sides result from the shape of the H2O
molecule. But back out of the world of metaphor, and into the quite
difficult area of law: I don't think we have a clear handle of what the
underlying principles of Baha'i law are. I think there has to be
considerable study, and guidance from the House, before we know where
those assumptions are located. I don't know that all of the important
ones are contained in the Aqdas. I was quite surprised to learn that
when Jesus was asked which of the Laws of Moses were the most important,
he reached into Leviticus and pulled out, to love God with our whole
hearts, and our neighbors as ourselves. My guess is we will be looking
closely at the Guardian's comments, in WOB and ADJ, where he identifies
the root principles.
From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpThu Nov 23 01:55:59 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 95 15:52:29 JST
From: "Stephen R. Friberg" <friberg@will.brl.ntt.jp>
To: rvh3@columbia.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Your Posting
Dear Richard:
Your posting on the subject of improving the adminstrative institutions
is excellent, and well in accord with what many outside the US believe.
It is American provincialism, I believe, that holds that a very explicit
legal code can create justice. Perhaps it is especially pronounced in
Japan, but here we see the present legal system in the United States as
failing to create safe cities or justice for the disadvantaged. The
perception, and it won't go away soon, is of a society in conflict
with itself. Legalism seems to be merely a license to turn a blind eye
towards the problem.
My main problem with the discussion of legal codes is that a "problem"
has been defined and characterized, and solutions are being proposed,
entirely on the basis of anecdotal evidence.
As a scientist, I am accustomed to the idea that perceptions,
especially those based on anecdotal evidence, can be highly
misleading. If there is perception of a problem, then, the next
step is not to propose a solution, but to detemine if there is
in fact a problem. If there is, then the parameters characteristic
of the problem should be determined. On the basis of an understanding
of the problem and its causes, the possibilities of addressing that
problem should then be considered. Those possibilities include, but
are not limited to, idealized culturally-bound solutions.
It may be decided that an attempt to solve the problem would create
too many additional problems, and that attempts at a solution must wait.
Yours respectfully,
Stephen R. Friberg
From burlb@bmi.netThu Nov 23 23:28:12 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 95 00:42 PST
From: Burl Barer <burlb@bmi.net>
To: "[G. Brent Poirier]" <gpoirier@acca.nmsu.edu>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Baha'i Bill of Rights/criminal code
"The best criterion whereby you can measure the spiritual attainment of an
Assembly is the extent its members feel themselves responsible for the
welfare of the group. And perchance they feel forced to deprive a person
from his vote it should only be to safeguard the rest and not merely to
inflict punishment" (from a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi)
I found the expressions "feel forced" and "should only" to be significant.
Although this was written on behalf of the Guardian, and not by his own
hand, I think it communicates quite well.
Burl (still working on my five hour dog and pony show regarding the
Spiritual Destiny of America which I will give at Menucha Winter School
starting on Friday. I think I will begin with a rollicking condemnation of
administrative repression, a cry on behalf of the suppressed elite, I will
rail wildly agaist the lack of nurturing of our Baha'i artists, the rampant
homophobia in our communities, the relegation of women to the coffee pot
brigade (Linda, got any decaf handy?), the repugnent treatment of our
academic scholars, the disrespect shown Baha'is who work in media and most
especially advertising and marketing, the fear of youth that don't look like
the cast of Growing Pains, Sherman's trauma over Ahmad's Seed of Creation
Theory, and show them photos of DIckie's Barber Shop. That should get their
attention. After having done all that,
I will whack them over the head several times with the Will and Testament of
Abdul Baha, The Advent of Divine Justice, and Citadel of Faith. That should
use up the first 45 minutes. After that, I will ad lib.
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From 100735.2257@compuserve.comThu Nov 23 23:28:38 1995
Date: 23 Nov 95 07:27:57 EST
From: "H.C. deFlerier deCourcelles" <100735.2257@compuserve.com>
To: "\"Donald Zhang Osborn\"" <osborndo@pilot.msu.edu>
Cc: Talisman <TALISMAN@indiana.edu>
Subject: Tone, Words, Utterance
Chere Monsieur Donald Zhang Osborn,
I have found your contribution to be very interesting and aptly suited to
the present day needs of the Human Society:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
>Allah'u'abha!
> In response to a thread on "tone" (which I confess to not
>having followed closely, although I posted on it earlier), I
>would like to offer a few thoughts. I conclude with a suggested
>amendment to list rules.
> Perhaps it would be most instructive to shift the focus of
>discussion from "tone" to utterance and choice of words, and to
>refer more frequently to the Writings on the subject.
> "Tone" seems hard to define, especially on E-mail, where all
>the physical aspects of tone are absent. It is easier to focus
>on choice of words (and I do not hold myself up as a positive
>example in this category). How does one change one's tone? By
>choosing one's words. So why not focus directly on that?
<DELETIONS>
--------------------------------------------------------------
I find that the Writings of the Baha'i Faith contains two main aspects,
namely, 1. The Administrative Order and 2. The Spiritual Being.
What you have alluded to concerns the aspect of the Spiritual Being. All
the Writings that I have so far come across seem to converge on the Spiritual
Being of the Human Society and alos summarise and strongly underline what
philosophers and reformers have been saying generation after generation - and
age after age. Baha'i may like to call it Progressive Revelation.
Of course, we are familiar with some pre-Babi wise sayings:
Soul supercedes the mind and the mind supercedes the body.
-- unknown
Then there is another that has impressed me since very long:
Watch your thoughts as they can transpire into your words.
Watch your words as they can transpire into your deeds.
Watch your deeds as they can turn into your habits.
Watch your habits as they are your character.
Watch your character as it shapes your destiny.
--- unknown
Then the last but not the least:
O SON OF SPIRIT
My first counsel is this: Possess a pure kindly and radiant heart,
that thine may be a sovereignty ancient, imperishable and
everlasting.
It is especially interesting to note that Baha'U'llah Himself has
referred to it as "His First Counsel." This, quite obviously, means that without
the Human Society heeding to this counsel, all the other elements of His
Teachings will be without foundation and totally meaningless.
A spirit that conforms with the First Counsel of Baha'U'llah can only
transpire similar thoughts - in turn, the deeds, the habits, the character and
the destiny. I understand that this is what Baha'U'llah meant by those above
words.
Luxembourg City Avec beacoup d'amitie
23-Nov-'95 H-C. de Flerier
From JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduThu Nov 23 23:33:57 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 95 10:00:22 EWT
From: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Mani
Mani is a curious case. He looks very much like a Judeo-Christian
tradition prophet but was never recognized as being in any sense
legitimate except among his own followers. (I have a private
suspicion that the "Sabeans" of the Qur'an might have been
Manichaeans, but doubtless Chris Buck will set me straight.)
In a lot of ways, Mani seems to have been the prototype of a modern
religion: a scriptural canon, an organized administrative structure,
a well-organized missionary effort, etc. I think they simply failed to
establish themselves as the dominate religion in any significant region
and were eventually ground down by relentless persecution everywhere.
They lasted longest in China, dying out there sometime early in the
present millenium.
As far as I know, the Cathars were not authentically Manichean: they did
not know the name Mani, practice the distinctive Manichaean rituals, etc.
The church probably called them Manichaeans because of some
percieved doctrinal similarity. (Medieval churchmen knew Manichaeans
through St. Augustine, who had been one in his youth.)
Because of all the persecution, our knowledge of Manichaeism is
pretty fragmentary and is derived from heresiographies, fragmentary
hymn books (Manichaeans were very big on hymns in the vernaculars),
and the like. It is also an extraordinary difficult subject to study. The
Manichaeans were firm believers in translating literature into the local
languages, so a serious Manichaeanist needs to know Greek, Latin, Coptic,
various Middle Iranian languages, Chinese, and the major European
research languages, among others.
john walbridge
P. S. I don't know of any explicit reference to Mani or Manichaeism in
the Baha'i writings, but there was an article on the subject by Howard
Geary in *World Order Magazine* in the mid-70s.
From margreet@margreet.seanet.comThu Nov 23 23:34:11 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 07:32:34 -0800
From: "Marguerite K. Gipson" <margreet@margreet.seanet.com>
To: Burl Barer <burlb@bmi.net>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Baha'i Bill of Rights/criminal code
Well, Wish I was at Menucha this year... This Campground is one of the best
for just a small intimate gathering of the Friends, it really boost the
soul........
Good luck Burl... I just hope they don't throw you over the Cliff...
Ps.. Take a look out over the pool... Gorgeous view!
warmly,
Margreet
At 12:42 AM 11/23/95 PST, Burl Barer wrote:
>"The best criterion whereby you can measure the spiritual attainment of an
>Assembly is the extent its members feel themselves responsible for the
>welfare of the group. And perchance they feel forced to deprive a person
>from his vote it should only be to safeguard the rest and not merely to
>inflict punishment" (from a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi)
>
>I found the expressions "feel forced" and "should only" to be significant.
>Although this was written on behalf of the Guardian, and not by his own
>hand, I think it communicates quite well.
>
>Burl (still working on my five hour dog and pony show regarding the
>Spiritual Destiny of America which I will give at Menucha Winter School
>starting on Friday.
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduThu Nov 23 23:35:04 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 95 11:28:08 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: male aggression
Dear Derek and Burl, I want to wish you two particularly a happy Thanksgiving.
I always like to take special note of people with special needs on holidays.
Since the two of you are "computerly challenged" (I suppose that is the term I
should used), I feel that special compassion is called for. Kathy and I would
like to let you know that, since we have had no difficulties communicating
privately about the use of Great Danes and SWAT teams at Bosch, that we will be
happy to provide you with any assistance so that you can communicate your
sacred communications in private.
Also, I would like to thank Chris Buck and Rob Stockman for not saying anything
about me at the AAR conference behind my back. This is obvious from Derek's
postings. How can I tell? Well, the giveaway was when Derek referred to my
black and red lace. Believe me, it wasn't black and red.
As for my comments on Catholicism and Shi'ism, I know that these traditions are
not terribly popular among many groups. I am not referring to any kind of
"normative" practice of these religions. What I am saying is that adherents of
these religions tend to find their own niches and while adhering to basic ideas
and laws, they still find the means to satisfy themselves spiritually without
feeling a great deal of constraint. Farzin's comments on this subject were
wonderful. Perhaps he should post them again.
As for the title of this posting - I read an article in the local paper about a
study entitled "Mic Study Links Male Aggesssion, Chemical." It says, and I
quote, "New resarch suggests tha tmales may be like autos with their
accelerators welded to the floor, their aggessive and sexual urges held in
check by constant application of the brakes. Scientists at Johns Hopkins
University reported Thrusday in the Bri5tish Jornal Nature that male mice with
a single gene switched off -- so their brains can't produce the chemical nitric
oxide - exhibit a startling pattern of behavior. They appear fearless when
hanging upside down from miniature tightropes, lingering for long periods while
normal mice scramble to right themselvs. They chase squealing female mice
around their cges for hours, even when the females are not in heat. Male mice
typically quickly stop trying to mate with females that are not in estrus." It
continues, but I think this is enough. This is my public service for today.
Now you guys know what is wrong with you. You can all send your thanks for
this posting either publicly or privately. In the meantime, I have to go
baste the turkey and hope that all the men I live with have a sufficient amount
of nitric oxide. (Please excuse the typing). Linda
From dpeden@imul.comThu Nov 23 23:35:10 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 95 19:17:05+030
From: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>
To: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Peace by 2000? What is that!
Dear Robert:
I don't keep copies of what I write. If historians of the future can find
something of value in what I write, they are welcome to it. I won't be
around to reap any royalties.
I can't write a book. If I try "to write", nothing comes. So, I don't
worry about it, and just write what I think. I like typewriters better than
hand writing, as I can't write as fast as the thoughts fly through my head.
I like computers better than typewriters, because it is such an easy process
of correction (I always hated white out and erasures) and copies are so easy
to make. I can type as fast as I think at 70 wpm, and so it works. I also
am able to stick both feet down my throat at the same time using this new
technology. Ain't it grand!
Painting, etching, drawing and stitching, on the other hand are entirely
different processes. It is very meditative, and you really have to "get out
of the way" and let the painting or piece tell you what it wants and needs.
It is often very informative, as the work "talks". It is a matter of
response. I guess writing is too, but words often get in the way.
Laughing,
Bev.
>Dear Bev,
> If you are not keeping copies of your letters, then I hope Eric's
>got them safely tucked away. I simply do not know how you manage to write
>so much with such fluency and colour. Historians of the future will use
>the letters/record, surely, and, in the meantime, if your painting muse
>ever deserts you, you could write a smashing book...
>
>If what I am saying detracts attention from the seriousness of your "Peace
>by 2000? What is that!" letter, then I am sorry.
>
>from the temperate zone,
>
>Robert.
>
>
>
>
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comThu Nov 23 23:35:20 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 10:02:14 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT <derekmc@ix.netcom.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE . Male Agression: Getting the Truth of AAR
So we were able to get Linda to admit her naughty actions at AAR. As a
Gentleman I would never refer to the actual colur of lace a Lady wore .
But there you have it folks the Story of Linda at AAR is true , she was
disqualified in the Cassock twirling contest for showing lace and
causing heart problems in the Judges . Threw an egg at Christopher Buck
, made Rob Stockman do a three-legged race at 4.00 o'clock in the
morning with the Bishop of Los Cruces yelling Go Go Robbie me boyo ,
won the Tobacco spitting contest with a 112.5 foot record effort and
kicked on the shins the 'alternative lifestyle ' Southern Baptist
Minister she decked last year in Florida because he refused to share
his orange juice . I think it is a credit to Rob Stockman that he has
shown such admirable fortitude in not mentioning all of the above .
A very Happy Thanksgiving to everybody .
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
From brburl@mailbag.comThu Nov 23 23:36:02 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 12:30:08 -0600
From: Bruce Burrill <brburl@mailbag.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Buddhist theology
Bev recently stated: > 'According to my understanding of Buddhism
(may I, please, not get stomped on by all the Buddhist sandals in the
room), our spirit or soul is created perfect...it is God's image. We
practice our spiritual reality, and thereby unpeel layers of "stuff" which
hid that perfection. When we have become fully re-acquainted with our
true spiritual nature, this is enlightment. Baha'u'llah refers to the same
in the Hidden Words. Might I suggest including some of them in your
daily prayers? They really are the perfect affirmation.' <
Hmmm, trying put Buddhism into a theistic cast is like trying to put the
Terminator into Pee Wee Herman's suit, but it might be a useful
exercise to in the very least to make explicit an underlying assumption
in Bev's statement. To say the soul was created perfect in god's image
is to assume a very specific stance that assume a distance between god
and its creation, but after massaging Buddhist concepts into a theistic
framework, to say that our soul was created in god's image is to miss
the insight of the Buddha. We would, rather, see Buddhism stating that
our "soul" is no different in its nature than the very nature of god. To
borrow from Meister Eckhart (imperfectly remembered), the eye by
which god sees me is the eye by which I see god. To see, to know, our
true nature, which we can do fully, is see, to know, god fully, which is
enlightenment.
Bev's statement may be good Baha'i or Christian theology, but it is not
good Buddhist "theology."
Bruce
From burlb@bmi.netThu Nov 23 23:36:24 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 95 09:42 PST
From: Burl Barer <burlb@bmi.net>
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: male aggression
Linda (call me Minnie) Walbridge said of nitric oxide deficient mice:
They chase squealing female mice
>around their cges for hours, even when the females are not in heat. Male mice
>typically quickly stop trying to mate with females that are not in estrus."
As human females do not have estrus cycles, male humans would have to wait a
dreadfully long time for females to be in estrus..hence Plato's famous
statement: "Estrus frustrates us for lack of justice. In the world of
beasts, estrus in predictable, but for just us there is neither estrus nor
justice" (attributed)
To wait an eternity for that which will never happen is more of a
Judaic/cynical/psuedo-Orthodox Messianic Conundrum and does not fit well
with the Guardian's statments regarding a full and rewarding sex life.
A night without nitric is a day of sunshine, a joy to the soul even
surpassing a light breakfast.
Burl (call me squeeky) Barer
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From burlb@bmi.netThu Nov 23 23:37:04 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 95 12:17 PST
From: Burl Barer <burlb@bmi.net>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Thanksgiving
Well, loaded with mice traps and spiritual soles for running the rat race, I
am off to Menucha Winter School (beware the cliff!). I have plenty of
handouts, a grab bag of Divine Utterances, and a Visa card for buying pop,
Old Golds, and candy on the way down. My son, Jordan, thinking Menucha is a
hotel, is coming with me! Poor kid is about to be more dissilusioned than a
busload of Baha'i scholars at a publishers convention.
I know you foreigners don't have a thanksgiving (except copy-cat Canadians)
and that is of course because not living in America, you have no reason to
be thankfull. America is the "greatest" country on Earth, and it is also
the "best" and "most important" and our culture, which we gladly export, is
the new "universal standard" thanks to the American invention of the
Universal Pricing Code. This is all part of my Destiny of America talk -- by
the time I am done, Baha'is will be marching on Washington DC demanding our
borders be closed, our minds shut, our schools turned into youth detention
centers, and then I will begin campaigning for elected office. What? You
say all of the above are already happening except for the part about me
running for office. Well, in that case, never mind. [sigh]
Happy Male Aggressive Thanksgiving and may all your seeds be creative.
Burl
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From StrayMutt@aol.comThu Nov 23 23:37:17 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 15:25:58 -0500
From: StrayMutt@aol.com
To: HICKC89@ollamh.ucd.ie
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Lenin Quote
To: Darach Watson
Dept. Experimental Physics
UCD, Rep. of Ireland
Fm: Bob Ballenger
Re: Your query on use of quote from V. I. Lenin.
Sir, you asked why I used a quote from V.I. Lenin, the leader of the Soviet
Communist Party, in my posting on a Baha'i Bill of Rights.
Elementary, my dear Watson [I've waited years to be able to write that]: it
seemed applicable to the situation under discussion.
From margreet@margreet.seanet.comThu Nov 23 23:37:44 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 12:29:29 -0800
From: "Marguerite K. Gipson" <margreet@margreet.seanet.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: male aggression
At 11:28 AM 11/23/95 EWT, LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu wrote:
>Dear Derek and Burl, I want to wish you two particularly a happy Thanksgiving.
>I always like to take special note of people with special needs on holidays.
>Since the two of you are "computerly challenged" (I suppose that is the term I
>should used), I feel that special compassion is called for. Kathy and I would
>like to let you know that, since we have had no difficulties communicating
>privately about the use of Great Danes and SWAT teams at Bosch, that we will be
>happy to provide you with any assistance so that you can communicate your
>sacred communications in private.
I can help too, I am a Computer Support Technician.... Cheap!
>Also, I would like to thank Chris Buck and Rob Stockman for not saying anything
>about me at the AAR conference behind my back. This is obvious from Derek's
>postings. How can I tell? Well, the giveaway was when Derek referred to my
>black and red lace. Believe me, it wasn't black and red.
Oh, Linda... Do we have color blind men here??? Can't tell
white/beige/nude (yes there is a color nude in ladies undergarments) from
black or red???/
>As for my comments on Catholicism and Shi'ism, I know that these traditions are
>not terribly popular among many groups. I am not referring to any kind of
>"normative" practice of these religions. What I am saying is that adherents of
>these religions tend to find their own niches and while adhering to basic ideas
>and laws, they still find the means to satisfy themselves spiritually without
>feeling a great deal of constraint. Farzin's comments on this subject were
>wonderful. Perhaps he should post them again.
>
>As for the title of this posting - I read an article in the local paper about a
>study entitled "Mic Study Links Male Aggesssion, Chemical." It says, and I
>quote, "New resarch suggests tha tmales may be like autos with their
>accelerators welded to the floor, their aggessive and sexual urges held in
>check by constant application of the brakes. Scientists at Johns Hopkins
>University reported Thrusday in the Bri5tish Jornal Nature that male mice with
>a single gene switched off -- so their brains can't produce the chemical nitric
>oxide - exhibit a startling pattern of behavior. They appear fearless when
>hanging upside down from miniature tightropes, lingering for long periods while
>normal mice scramble to right themselvs. They chase squealing female mice
>around their cges for hours, even when the females are not in heat. Male mice
>typically quickly stop trying to mate with females that are not in estrus." It
>continues, but I think this is enough. This is my public service for today.
>Now you guys know what is wrong with you. You can all send your thanks for
>this posting either publicly or privately. In the meantime, I have to go
>baste the turkey and hope that all the men I live with have a sufficient amount
>of nitric oxide. (Please excuse the typing). Linda
My, my!!! So, Nitric oxide, uh??? Nitric oxide is an intermediate in the
manufacture of nitric acid from ammonia... I thought all this time it was
C19 H28 O2 poisoning...
margreet
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comThu Nov 23 23:37:57 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 13:17:08 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT <derekmc@ix.netcom.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re .Male aggression colur blindness . Talisman Cover Up Plan proposed
Dear Talismanians
As the question was posed as to male colour blindness over the sighting
of Linda's Lace at AAR . I am not able to answer for such worthies as
Burl , Chris or Rob. I can inform the varied world of Talisman that I
am one of those lucky fellows who is not colour blind . Most men do
suffer from being colour blind either in terms of an actual colour or
of the shade variations within a colour. Hence the frequent despair for
Ladies over why their worse half does not see the subtle colour
blending and toning she has achieved either in dress or interior decor.
I worked in the textile industry for several years and was tested to
see if I was colour blind by the dyeing and finishing departments .
Did you know there are more variations of the colour white used in
dyeing fabric than any other colour . So if I saw Linda's lace and I
was a cad then I could tell you all the exact colour. Naturally one
would not discuss , even in the intimate privacy of Talisman , such
personal matters in rspect of a Lady , the very thought of revealing
such matters sends shivers down my spine . I mean Linda may be strange
but she is our Linda and I think we should do all we can to cover up
her foibles.So Talismanians should we cover up Linda's actions or not.
Please E' Mail your thoughts to Linda who will be delighted to hear
them . Just send a simple message that says either Yes or No to
Talisman Cover Up Plan care of Linda Walbridge , Bruce as a Buddhist of
course can do his own variation on that if he wishes.
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
From TLCULHANE@aol.comThu Nov 23 23:39:46 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 16:24:56 -0500
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: your post
Dear Stephen ,
Goodness you touched a nerve ! I am off to ABS in Texas so do not have
the time to give one of my rousing Americanophile defenses of the land of
religious freedom . I am wondering though if your characterization of this
country as divided against itself is the exclusive property of the U. S. I
realize it is the 6 o'clock news version of America . On the other hand you
would be surprised at the 6 o'clock news version here of a number of
additional locations on the planet . Be a fairly avid reader of non U. S.
newspapers I wonder is there some place on the planet that does not appear to
be divided against itself ? Excluding Bahji and Mt carmel :) No fair you
can't use them .
More when I return from Texas where we will be throwing a big barbecue in
Roberts honor - no we are not going to barbecue Robert - I think Derek is on
the menu for desert however .
And I am planning to corner Socrates for dinner to settle this matter once
and for all .
warm regards,
Terry
p.s. J T stock is stilll rising !
From TLCULHANE@aol.comThu Nov 23 23:40:33 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 16:25:17 -0500
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: Bahai bill of rights
Dear Friends ,
I an fascinated by the discussion on this topic and want to make a
bfief comment on Richards post . I would agree that the real issue is one of
changing the internal culture of a community . The unwritten norms will be
the ones in the long run which make it possible to prevent abuses of power .
How my heart wishes for such a culture .
In the short run it seems to me it is necessary for some sort of
codified standard which acts as a symbol of that culture and which
'"reminds" us of what that is supposed to be . The quote from Burl - I
think- on this from the secretary of the Guardian gets to the point . It is a
less eloquent paraphrase of the paragragh k30 in the Most Holy Book which
ordains Houses of Justice . Perhaps if we pasted that paragraph and its
description of the attitudes and duties of members of the Houses of Justice (
Assemblies ) to every wall we would have a start. I think this passage also
constitutes the basis of a legal and cultural standard .
If every decision made or contemplated by an administrative institution
included in the consultation a review of this passage we would , in my view ,
have a good beginning . If those same decisions were consulted upon by the
friends with those same standards in mind and this text formed the basis of
that consultation we would go a long way toward an open and more united
community . If the friends truly thought that they could expect admin.
institution to adhere to the standard of k30 and the institutions understood
that its decisions would be viewed in light of this paragraph I believe we
would start to have the culture change Richard suggests is necessary and
with which I agree .
One salutary effect of such a standard would be in my view that the
believers would have a basis for commitment to institutional decisions and
not simply compliance . The issue for me is how do you create a culture in
which the governing bodies do not simply have the power to enforce decisions
but that enlists the support of those governed to "observe " rather than
only obey . This is the power and mandate to rule issue .It is one Bahai s
will have to do better at addressing if we expect to transform our own
community let alone offer something substantive to the world . It gets to the
heart of "legitimacy".
I propose that k30 constitute that legal / cultural standard . I further
propose that the House of Worship - in both its inner and outer forms become
the cultural symbol of the ethical /.moral reality that Richard has suggested
. If once we "see' that we are the house of worship - the Mashriqu l Adhkar
as Abdul Baha has asserted our inner identity changes and I believe that
admin . institution decisions will need to take into accout how that
decision affects and reflects the truth that "In reality the radiant hearts
are the Mashriqu l Adhkar . . " In this context for an individual member of
or for an admin. institution to abuse its power to not honor its "trusteeship
" would be tantamount to desecration of the House of Worship . And
desecrating a House of worship - institutional or individual is about as
close to blasphemy in action as there is . This is why I believe Justice is
the best Beloved of our Best Beloved .
I would proposet that those better trained than I examine k30 and
identify the fundamental philosphical and legal standards it implies with
respect to the proper functioning and decision making od the admin.
institutions of the community . Then I believe we would begin to have a legal
code that would not be bureaucratic and a culture that would exert real peer
pressure in the direction of creating and sustaining a community based on the
best loved attribute - justice - of the Blessed Beauty .
warm regards ,
Terry
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzThu Nov 23 23:40:58 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 11:31:31 +1100
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: Bruce Burrill <brburl@mailbag.com>, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Buddhist theology
In response to a letter from Bev, Bruce wrote:
We would, rather, see Buddhism stating that
>our "soul" is no different in its nature than the very nature of god. To
>borrow from Meister Eckhart (imperfectly remembered), the eye by
>which god sees me is the eye by which I see god. To see, to know, our
>true nature, which we can do fully, is see, to know, god fully, which is
>enlightenment.
While I respect the healthy iconoclasm of Bruce's positions on Buddhism, I
do feel that *experientially* we are talking about pretty-much the same
things. From a purely experiential standpoint we really cannot tell
whether we are of the same nature as God, or a reflection of that nature,
or even of a different nature entirely. Ultimately we rely on Scripture for
our ontologies and even epistemologies. However, each person, whether
Buddhist of Baha'i, has to discover and experience for him or her own self
the peace and joy of approaching her or his Goal.
In Buddhist and Hindu traditions there is a saying which goes "not this,
not that" (netti netti). This refers to the "negative" onion peeling
approach to enlightenment, of which Bev wrote. Bruce seems to assume that
Bahai's have placed an un-necessary theistic veil over the far end of the
corridor (of progressive detachment and purification) towards
enlightenment, but -- as I have said -- experientially this is not
necessarily the case. Even subtle Baha'i Scriptural analysis brings
forth this same realisation - the ridiculousness if iconic theism is, for
instance, apparent in the Baha'i belief that God is an unknowable
essence...
Even is each of us conceals the potentials implied by "Thou are That", we
can nonetheless generally agree that the mortal human body in its
perishing is quite different to that which is Imperishable..... And so on,
and so on...
Does Bruce really think that either Buddha or Jesus currently thinks that
the other got it wrong, or was dealt an inferior hand? Huh?
Robert.
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comThu Nov 23 23:41:09 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 15:19:00 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT <derekmc@ix.netcom.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Mani information regarding.
Mani : 216-276CE
Mani it appears was raised in the Jewish-Christian sect of the Elchasaites . Their
origin it is believed in some academic circles to go directly back to the Qumran
Community and the Essenes. The Elchasaites were founded by Elchasaios in the first
century of the common era . They belonged to the Christian Church but stem from
the original Christian tradition of still following Jewish law. There is some good
evidence that Buddhist Missionaries reached Asia Minor and Egypt 100 years prior
to the common era and there was connection with the Essenes . So that Mani grew
up in an atmosphere of Religious openness is a reasonable assumption. At the age of
24 he had the calling of his heavenly 'Twin' and went out from the Elchasaites to
found his religion .
Mani wrote " He revealed to me the hidden mystery that was hidden from the
worlds and the generations : the mystery of the Depth and the Height : he revealed
to me the mystery of the Light and the Darkness ,the mystery of the conflict and the
great war which the Darkness stirred up. He revealed to me how the Light turned
,overcame the Darkness by their intermingling and thus came this world .......He
instructed me on the mystery of the Tree of Knowledge of which Adam ate , by
which his eyes were made to see , the mystery of the Apostles who were sent out
into this world to found the religions . ....... Thus was revealed to me by the
Paraclete all that has been and that shall be , and all that the eye sees and the ear
hears and the thought thinks . Through him I learned to know everything , I saw the
All through him , and I became one body and one spirit with him...."
So far scripture in 17 languages has been found . Great stress is made on hymns and
devotions . Mani appears to have written in at least 7 languages so the original
canon was rich and vast. He died in chains during the reign of Vahram 1. Although
there is no mention of Mani in the Baha'i Writings , I find it interesting that when
the Blessed Beauty refers to the suffering of those who carried the Spirit of God to
Humanity and His oneness with Them , being in chains is mentioned of course it
does not mean it was Mani but it makes you ponder.
Only one kingdom had the religion as the State religion and was centered in
Mongolia in the 8th and 9th centuries of the common era . The persecution of the
Manichaean Religion was especially fierce . It was though the first international
religion with followers from China to Spain and correctly can be designated as part
of the Gnostic Tradition .
The Scripture believed to come directly from Mani are : 1.Living Gospel 2.
Treasure of Life 3. Treatise 4. Book of Mysteries < Secrets > 5. Book of Giants 6.
Epistles 7. Psalms and Prayers.
The pattern of religious life included two 7 day fasts , there was a series of daily
obligatory prayers to perform of either four or seven depending on your status in the
religion. A Monday religious service and weekly confessions . There was also
monthly fast on the 30th day of which fell the festival of Bema which
commemorated Mani's death and martyrdom . The community was divided into
Elect , Auditors and Laity . Absolute chastity was demanded of the Elect who
ministered to the Laity and also some later were housed in Monasteries . I suggest
the Roman Catholic Church owes more of its structure to the form of the Religion of
Mani than the reverse .
In the scriptures there are references to the Third Messenger and the Maiden of
Light . The Messenger being Jesus , much was made of the return of Jesus and the
restoring of the Realm of Light . It is true to say with the wisdom of hindsight the
religion takes the form of syncretistic religion fusing elements of Judaism
,Christianity , Zoroasterianism and Buddhism but there are separate , profound and
spiritually moving aspects which belong to none of those traditions .
John wondered about the Sabeans and the followers of Mani I personally do not
believe they are the same from the research I have done so far . But if it could be
shown they were , then Mani would join the level of the known Manifestations of
God.
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
From ahmada@acsusun.acsu.unsw.edu.auThu Nov 23 23:41:20 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 10:52:21 +1100
From: Ahmad Aniss <ahmada@acsusun.acsu.unsw.edu.au>
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: scripture classes or dating agency
Dear Talismanians
Dear Derek,
You wrote:
> the best therapy to overcome the Seed of Creation is two gophers and a
> quail a day.
O my God! you really converted me to a vegetarian. Something that many
have tried for so long with out any success.
> We have noted the various comments of our dear hidden friend Ahmad.
>I am ordered by Sherman to inform you you need to try his famous
> recipe yourself. As far Ladies are concerned I am on December 8th
> through the 10th conducting a class on Relationships here at the Bosch
> Baha'i School in Santa Cruz California. So far the Ladies out number
> the men by 6.5 to 1. 28 people enrolled so far . So Ahmad come to
> Bosch that weekend there are 23 lovely ladies at least in the class I am
> running. Normally bookings increase by 50% over the last 2 weeks . So
> we should have a group of at least 42 people , 34 being Ladies . So
> desperate unmarried Ahmad come to the jolly old USA for the weekend
> I promise as your teacher not to reveal your true identity as the
> 'villainous scounderel' Ahmad 'The Seed' Annis to the class .
Whole heartedly I thank thee for the above offer, but alas I must
decline. This is not because I am a shy person and do not like to
endanger my privacy, but because you need one of those "beam me
Scottie" thingymagic to get me two weeks from now to Santa Cruz,
California. Yet, if I see a free ticket buzzing my way, may be I can talk
over my boss at work for a weekend frenzy.
By the way, what good will that make if you would not reveal my true
identity.
Alas, on a revenge note, are you running a Scripture class or a dating
agency.
> You wiil of course as is required of all my students if you find someone
> you wish to marry have to obtain my consent, once you have been a
> student of mine.
What are you, the God-father of those lovely ladies?
I see now how my article was dispersed to 20 ladies there, I just got
the following note from one of those lovely ladies you talking about.
"My desk is located next to Derek Cockshut and today he abruptly
handed a few e-mail messages to me and suggested I introduce myself to
you. Although I found most of the messages quite amusing, I need to read
the"Seed of Creation" theory in order to fully appreciate them. I would
be pleased to receive a copy from you since Derek refuses to part with
this controversial piece of theory."
Also from the same lady:
"I also understand there is a Ladies
Posse in Australia hunting you down? (You and Crocodile Dundee)."
By the way distortion of news from the Walla Walla barbershop is called a
treason and a heinous crime. I hope you realise that.
With giggles,
Your servant,
Ahmad.
_______________________________________________________________________
^ ^
^ Dr. A.M. Aniss, Tel: Home [61(2)] 505 509 ^
^ Bio-Medical Engineer, Work [61(2)] 694 5915 ^
^ Neuropsychiatric Institute, Mobile 019 992020 ^
^ Prince Henry Hospital, Fax: Work [61(2)] 694 5747 ^
^ Little Bay, N.S.W. 2036, ^
^ Australia. Email: A.Aniss@unsw.edu.au ^
^_______________________________________________________________________^
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comThu Nov 23 23:42:25 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 18:48:17 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT <derekmc@ix.netcom.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Sherman changes Ahmad . Victory for our fearless leader.
Once more I am in awe of Sherman's ability to change people . There was
Ahmad a
determined <rumor has almost fanatical > Meat and Potatoes man , the
diet
coming from his Seed of Creation theory . Men who dominant need their
meat .
Yet one word from Sherman and he is a proclaimed Veggie .
Ahmad wonders why the young lady who has contacted him <poor child> had
not
read the infamous theory . Simple Ahmad old chap , she works at the
school .I gave
your theory to a series of guests not staff .
You wanted exposure to Ladies I offered you the relationship session .
as all my
students know : Hard work killed nobody but it keeps you busy . It is a
course
based on the Writings . The Baha'i dating service as far as I am aware
has not
started up yet. There are some things to be grateful for.
I have a simple rule once my student always my student so of course you
would ask
for my consent. I do not discriminate in terms of gender as a teacher .
By the way Linda E'Mailed me and said how thrilled she was over the
Talisman
cover up plan .
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
PS I told Nancy you were 6ft 3ins weighed 205 lbs had wavy brown hair
and gray/
blue eyes . Looked a little like Tom Cruise with a dash of Paul
McCartney . Drove
a Porsche , had a 42 foot yacht and a beautiful beach-front house .
Did I do well
Ahmad ?
From dpeden@imul.comThu Nov 23 23:42:33 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 06:04:25+030
From: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>
To: Bruce Burrill <brburl@mailbag.com>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Buddhist theology
Dear Bruce:
The reason my statment is not a good buddhist "theology" is probably because
I am not buddhist. But it is a good attempt at trying to understand.
>
From HICKC89@ollamh.ucd.ieFri Nov 24 00:36:00 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 13:46:07 +0000 (GMT)
From: Vivien Hick <HICKC89@ollamh.ucd.ie>
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: jrcole@umich.edu
Subject: Re: spilling the beans
On Wed 22 Nov 1995, Juan wrote:
> Darach:
...
>
> This is Juan: I find it completely baffling that someone who advertises
> himself as being in a department of experimental physics should defend
> the practice of religious bodies attempting to intervene in academic free
> inquiry through complaint and intimidation. How would you feel if you
> had written a chapter on the Big Bang and a group of Christian
> fundamentalists came to your editor and publisher and argued it should
> not be published because it was contrary to the book of Genesis?
>
> In the world of intellectuals and academics, there is only one legitimate
> response to the academic writing of Denis MacEoin about the Baha'i Faith,
> and that is to write other articles in which his sources, allegations and
> conclusions are critically examined. (I am, incidentally, the only
> Baha'i historian actually to have engaged in some of this critique of
> MacEoin in print, so I am practicing what I am preaching).
>
> The attempt to intervene in the publication of an academic book was
> ham-handed, stupid, and scandalous, and unless Baha'is begin to
> understand that they have not been given some sort of divine sanction to
> act like boors, they will simply go on alienating thinking persons the
> world over. Then they complain about the "apathy" toward the Faith in
> the West!!
>
> Burl's point should not be lost sight of. This sort of thing goes down
> very badly with thinking people, and with the increasing publication of
> such stories by people involved in them such as MacEoin, the incidents
> and policies are becoming widely known and being spread via e-mail. The
> Faith is being hurt.
>
> So, Darach, I plead with you and with other like-minded Baha'is to
> rethink your position here, which transparently is one that damages the
> good name and best interests of the Baha'i Faith.
>
>
> cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
>
Juan,
there are a number of points I would like to address from your last
posting.
You choice of words in the first paragraph is entirely inappropriate
and misleading. "Complaint and intimidation" in no way describes the
action of the UK-NSA in this case. "Intimidation is "wildly out of
context.
Your comparison is inappropriate. A closer comparison would be
a book on "Models of the Universe" printed say around Galileo's time,
where a group of supporters of Galileo's ideas attempted to point out
to the editor that the essay written on Galileo's model had been
written by a proponent of Tycho Brahe's model. The comparison is
closer on a number of points, a) that the comparative circulation
would have a similar effect, b) that academic opinion would be
extremely polarised, c) the impact of the resulting volume could have
a lasting effect that might not be rectified in public thinking for
decades.
As the dialogue stands at present, the size of the debate is too
small to allow an ordinary academic discourse to occur. The
contributors are completely polarised for or against the Faith. The
idea that a widely-distributed general information book containing an
article on "Bahaism", written by a recognised opponent of the Faith,
can be effectively countered by articles written in Journals with a
relatively small and almost exclusively academic audience, is naive
to say the least. For the editor of such a volume to think that in a
debate as polarised as this one, that he could get an accurate
'objective' "poor-man's guide" to the Faith from just one source, was
quite evidently an error. The attempt by the UK-NSA to point this
out *may* have been (as you tactfully put it) "ham-handed" and
"stupid", but it was *necessary* in a situation where there are so few
Baha'i scholars of merit that editors turn to scholars such as
MacEoin for a definitive guide to a Faith of which they were once
members but now have a clearly evident bias against.
Finally, I do very much agree with you that in general a religious
administrative body attempting to intervene in the publication of an
academic work against them, not only looks extremely bad, but is in
fact unethical, if we take the idea of freedom of expression and an
unfettered search after truth seriously. This type of discourse
should be the domain of academics, scholars etc. not Assemblies. But
in the case where a general information book is being published with
an article that could have enormous ramifications for decades
afterwards, somebody had to inform the editor of that work that the
author of the article on "Bahaism" was recognised for his anti-Baha'i
polemic, because apprently he did not realise this.
Regards,
Darach Watson,
Final Year Student,
Dept. of Exp. Physics,
UCD,
Ireland.
From wp.loehndorf@essen.netsurf.deFri Nov 24 00:47:17 1995
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 13:07:18 +0100
From: Peter Loehndorf <wp.loehndorf@essen.netsurf.de>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Mani - a prophet?
Dear friends,
as far as I know Mani is not regarded as a prophet in the Baha'i Writings. I
don't know if his name is mentioned at all.
What do the friends think of him? He had IMHO all the characteristics of a
prophet: he founded a *universal* and religion, which had intentionally
ecclectic and synchretistic features. He promulgated his teachings in a
manner which can only be compared to Paul - regarding his missionary zeal.
He left written teachings, a theology, a *world-wide* community at his time.
Diocletian et alii did their best to wipe out this religion. A few hundered
years later the Mani-community (now called Catharers (spelling correct?))
vanished for ever. - Of course he was a radical concerning the way of life
of his Electi, but nobody had to become an Electus...
A few questions and some answers, please, if you find the subject interesting.
Baha'i Greetings: Peter
From jrcole@umich.eduFri Nov 24 00:51:14 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:35:50 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: Vivien Hick <HICKC89@ollamh.ucd.ie>
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: spilling the beans
Darach: I wanted to say that I am glad to be discussing these things
openly, and am grateful to you for posting your perspective; that in
taking issue with it I hope I am engaging in a sort of consultation, in
which the *ideas* are discussed without further reference to their
holder. I'm sure if we were on the same campus we'd have some warm and
cordial conversations about these things. So, it is nothing personal:
On Thu, 23 Nov 1995, Darach wrote:
>
> Juan,
> there are a number of points I would like to address from your last
> posting.
> You choice of words in the first paragraph is entirely inappropriate
> and misleading. "Complaint and intimidation" in no way describes the
> action of the UK-NSA in this case. "Intimidation is "wildly out of
> context.
>
Oh, I'm sure the members of the NSA who went to Hinnel and Penguin over
Denis's chapter were humbly attempting to set the record straight and
etc. But what they wanted, of course, was for Hinnel to have someone
favorable to the Baha'i Faith write the chapter, preferably a Baha'i. My
point was that from Hinnel's and Penguin's point of view, this is an
attempt by an external body to intervene in the editorial process, which
is ethically unacceptable in an academic context. If I had invited an
academic who was knowledgeable and intelligent and yet who had severe
misgivings about Islam as a religion to write a chapter for my edited
book, *Comparing Muslim Societies*; and if two members of the National
Steering committee for Muslims in the U.S. had shown up in my office
asking me to remove that man's chapter from my book, I would refuse and I
would be outraged. I fail to see how the Hinnel incident is any different.
> Your comparison is inappropriate.
I disagree, for the reasons stated above.
> As the dialogue stands at present, the size of the debate is too
> small to allow an ordinary academic discourse to occur.
Do you really think so? How much do you really know about this
field or how it works? Academic Babi-Baha'i studies as a respected
field of scholarship has arrived, most especially with Abbas Amanat's
1989 book from Cornell University Press; also there is Peter Smith's
Cambridge book; there are the 7 volumes of Studies in Babi and Baha'i
History/Religion, which academics cite and quote, and which now include
Christopher Buck's valuable book; there are numerous journal articles by
Todd Lawson, Peter Smith, Moojan Momen, and this ephemeral servant, as
well as impressive bodies of unpublished scholarship that will soon be
published, by John Walbridge, Stephen Lambden, and others.
> The contributors are completely polarised for or against the Faith.
Which means that attempting to knock Denis off the Handbook of Religions
assignment ipso facto represented an attempt to get someone drafted who
was favorable.
>The idea that a widely-distributed general information book containing an
> article on "Bahaism", written by a recognised opponent of the Faith,
> can be effectively countered by articles written in Journals with a
> relatively small and almost exclusively academic audience, is naive
> to say the least.
I hope you will reconsider your suggestion that I am naive about the way
my own field works. I may be wrong, I may be opinionated; but I am not
usually considered naive. No doubt I lack the innocence for it.
Seriously, we certainly do have Baha'is of
Hinnel's stature who are perfectly capable of editing other general
reference works and of providing information to the general public that
counters MacEoin's. Moreover, the specialized journal publications you
disparage are absolutely essential to the production of such tertiary,
respected reference works.
Indeed, the Baha'i Encyclopaedia itself *would* have been a
widely referred-to reference source for the general public, had it
actually appeared in an academic form.
>For the editor of such a volume to think that in a
> debate as polarised as this one, that he could get an accurate
> 'objective' "poor-man's guide" to the Faith from just one source, was
> quite evidently an error. The attempt by the UK-NSA to point this
> out *may* have been (as you tactfully put it) "ham-handed" and
> "stupid", but it was *necessary* in a situation where there are so few
> Baha'i scholars of merit that editors turn to scholars such as
> MacEoin for a definitive guide to a Faith of which they were once
> members but now have a clearly evident bias against.
There are "few Baha'i scholars of merit?" Denis is academically unemployed
and supports himself writing religious thrillers under the name of Daniel
Easterman. He is far less prominent or important in Babi-Baha'i studies
than Abbas Amanat, a full professor at Yale, and is academically rather
obscure compared to a number of Baha'is who post on Talisman.
Instead of attacking the editor for inviting MacEoin to write,
you should applaud his desire to even include a Baha'i chapter (which
other editors who hear the story will no doubt decline to do), and his
ability to find out who was the academic expert on the subject in the UK.
As for the polarized nature of the field, most fields are polarized.
Islam certainly is (academics who think well of the Khomeinist regime in
Iran do not get along with its bitter critics). An editor only has room
for one chapter on a subject, and simply has to trust the academic
expertise of the person she invites to write. It all comes out in the
wash; scholarship, even that published in reference works, is a
self-correcting process. The right thing to have done would have been to
take a philosophical attitude, and, perhaps, encourage a prominent Baha'i
academic to put together a rival reference work with a different
publisher, which would have a better treatment of the Baha'i Faith.
In fact, of course, academic Baha'i scholarship has such a
tenuous position inside the Faith and faces so many obstacles from the
Institutions and the believers, that Baha'is have hamstrung themselves;
in ordinary circumstances there is no reason a religion as large as ours
should not have a hundred academic experts in Middle East studies for every
MacEoin. As it is, we probably have 10 or 12. Assuming those 10 or 12
aren't chased out, the momentum is probably with us for the future.
Finally, I do very much agree with you that in general a religious
> administrative body attempting to intervene in the publication of an
> academic work against them, not only looks extremely bad, but is in
> fact unethical, if we take the idea of freedom of expression and an
> unfettered search after truth seriously. This type of discourse
> should be the domain of academics, scholars etc. not Assemblies.
Thank God!
> But in the case where a general information book is being published with
> an article that could have enormous ramifications for decades
> afterwards, somebody had to inform the editor of that work that the
> author of the article on "Bahaism" was recognised for his anti-Baha'i
> polemic, because apprently he did not realise this.
And you still think all this did more good than bad? The chapter was
published anyway, and the editor is reported to have a bad taste in his
mouth about us. Wise assemblies would have respectfully consulted with
Baha'i academics in the religious studies and Middle East studies fields
about what was the right tack to take. One big problem with this
religion is that people think being elected to office suddenly makes them
all-wise and they are relieved of the need to consult expertise any
longer. Having been electrical engineers or businessmen or something, they
suddenly become philosophers, historians, and philologists,
able to set the terms by which Baha'i scholarship must proceed,
miraculously, without the toil of 25 years of rigorous study, just by virtue
of a simple election. It really is marvellous to behold.
Regards,
> Darach Watson,
> Final Year Student,
> Dept. of Exp. Physics,
> UCD,
> Ireland.
my warmest regards to you, as well - Juan Cole, History, University of
Michigan
From jrcole@umich.eduFri Nov 24 00:51:43 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:47:04 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: Peter Loehndorf <wp.loehndorf@essen.netsurf.de>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Mani - a prophet?
Peter: I looked in the index to Ma'idih-'i Asmani, since I have a vague
recollection of `Abdu'l-Baha mentioning Mani there (in a dismissive way),
but, alas, I could not find the entry. I also remember Mr. Khadem
referring to this issue and saying that `Abdu'l-Baha knew about Mani but
that he was not a prophet.
In my own view, Manichaeanism had some missionary successes and was
around for a while, but I would not classify it as a world religion. And
just personally, I find the Gnostic denigration of matter and the body
therein distasteful and suspect that Mani was beset by some sort of
severe neurosis involving self-hatred.
cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
From brburl@mailbag.comFri Nov 24 12:20:52 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:31:04 -0600
From: Bruce Burrill <brburl@mailbag.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Buddhist theology
Don Peden or Bev or whomever,
>Dear Bruce:
>
>The reason my statment is not a good buddhist "theology" is probably because
>I am not buddhist. But it is a good attempt at trying to understand.
>>
You don't have to be a Buddhist to understand Buddhist "theology." Is it a
good attempt to understand Buddhism by casting it in a theistic light that
doesn't reflect its essential msg?
From ahmada@acsusun.acsu.unsw.edu.auFri Nov 24 12:21:09 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 18:04:43 +1100
From: Ahmad Aniss <ahmada@acsusun.acsu.unsw.edu.au>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: A heavenly angle on door-steps
Dear Talismanians,
Dear Quanta,
You wrote:
> > please do not read my post to
> >derek as it will giggle you to death.
>
> I read it and sent you a very lively message.
>
Thanks for you delightful message, see below
>
> >Attacking my personal life would not change any thing.
>
> I have no clue about this one! Can't you get a joke?
>
> >No! But I like to see an acknoweldgment that based on my deductions
> >from the writings one could come up with my conclusions.
>
> Okay! Send me just references (titles of books and page #'s)
> and I can look them up myself and arrive at my own conclusions.
>
This alas is a difficult thing to do I am still searching the writings for
more references. There is more to come to Talisman yet. I can only
say The direction is writings which relate this physical world and that
of the Malekut world. Don't despair I will post them on Talisman as
I get to complete the search.
>
> >1. Is it better to beleive in so called "Big Bang" as a causeless
> >event for creation of Universe?
>
> I never said it was causeless. We agree on the causative formation,
> only differ on the concepts of the process itself.
>
So we agree on the causative formation and differ on the concepts that both
are presented to mankind by single individuals, one by a scientist in 1930's and
one by me. By the way, the "Big Bang" theory was also inspiration of a single
person and yet it has come to become a common understanding.
> >Also, Is it not why we beleive in Manifestations of God, don't they
> >originate concepts from God and don't we adapt them and consult on them
> >and use them. Aren't these concepts originated from one single person
> >at their inception? Shouldn't you deny them the truth?
>
> 1- I do not equate you, or what you say to the Manifestation of God
> and His Words.
How on earth did you deduce that I was equateing my words with our
beloved Manifestations of God. I was merely pointing out that concepts
originate at inception by single individuals as they are inspirations from
above.
> 2- The reason for women not serving on the House of Justice has not
> been given by Baha'ullah, Abdu'l'Baha and the Beloved Guardian.
> So, my question is who are you to say that you know the answer?
I am no body but yet the answer must appear some how don't you think
it could come by inspiration to a lowly man of God.
> As you remember, a few months ago you stated that leadership
> was an inherently male thing and I should not wait for something
> that was not "inherent in nature", in response to my poem.
>
How could I say that leadership is an inherent male thing. I am saying that
those nine men together as an institution are a female entity towards God.
What relationship this has with all men. Yet, all men have the potential of
being chosen, but that does not equate to what you claiming that I have said.
Also You wrote:
> Sorry, I am not in a charming, poetic commentator mood these days.
Woe! what a shame, I was really awaiting for a rhyme to come on my direction.
Don't tell me that the after effects of the growth of the "Seed of Creation" has
caused a similar traumatic effect on you, that same traumatic effect which touched
the dear Sherman and his humble scribe. If that is the case accept the advise of
the wise hakim and take a session of psychotherapy for a day or so(don't login).
> But, do not take everything so serious. We are just becoming friends.
I have not taken these verses neither satanic nor serious. I am giggling too, you
know.
>
> >However, I take joy in the fact that our writings are reach and if one followes the
> >deductions I made from the writings He or she should come to the same
> >conclusions.
>
> We have to get the assistance of our scholars and scientists on this.
Woe! my Dear Quanta,
Wasn't Baha'u'llah that stated that in this day and age, every one is encumbered
to search after the true by him/herself and hear not the voice of the fool Mulla?
>
> >As to describing me as a lookalike of the writer Salman Rushti, I have
> >to say that he wrote *satanic verses*
>
> I thought that it was just the title of the book. Did you read it?
I have not! Yet I trust, he was condemning Muhammad of unchaste life.
>
> >Perchance his lucks may turn around and a heavenly angle may drop in
> >on his door-steps.
>
> Would you be interested in being my son-in law? My daughter Ayla is
> a very deepened Baha'i. She is 24 yrs. 5'9" and absolutely beautiful.
> She is gonna kill me for this one, of course. But, I will sign the consent papers
> just before my last breath. She always talks about Australia.
What a honour to become your son in law!
Ayla a beauty of 5`9``and 24 odd years old, alas a heavenly angle from the blessed
land of Abdu'l-Baha. See the description of me, in derek's latest master piece and
my reply to it.
But "signing the consent papers just before my last breath", sounds like no consent
at all. Poor enamoured Ahmad fallen in an instant love with Ayla. How can he
survive with an unsigned consent. Wasn't Baha'u'llah that asked for the parental
consent as a sign of heavenly union or am I mistaken?
May I take my chances and suggest an invitation for your family to come to
New Zealand in January for the International Conference and may be then fly over
to Sydney and accept my hostility (ops! hospitality) and stay in my Mansion
for a while, I be happy to show you, our lively Sydney and the left overs.
>
> >As a matter of fact, he is a desperate unmarried bachalor who will wellcome
> > whole heartedly and seeking at all times the pleasure of companionship of those
> >lovely ladies you mentioned.
> >As to a search by the ladies Posse in Australia goes, what else can
> >he wish for, is he mad to hide himself of such a bounty. Please send
> >them in from the other side of the world, nay from the whole world
> >perchance he may get lucky.
>
> Wait a minute! I hear some Freudian slips here. What happened to
> *no polygamy" etc. etc. etc.? <G>
No Freudian slip! No POLYGAMY! just a slip of the tongue.
>
> >Has evolution changed
> > *mankind* ???
> >so much that ladies on the other side
> >of the world have transformed into a different
> > *human female spceies*????
> >and they differ greatly from those in down-under.
>
> HMMMM??
Yes HMMMM! me too?
With Baha'i Love and Fellowship,
Ahmad.
_______________________________________________________________________
^ ^
^ Dr. A.M. Aniss, Tel: Home [61(2)] 505 509 ^
^ Bio-Medical Engineer, Work [61(2)] 694 5915 ^
^ Neuropsychiatric Institute, Mobile 019 992020 ^
^ Prince Henry Hospital, Fax: Work [61(2)] 694 5747 ^
^ Little Bay, N.S.W. 2036, ^
^ Australia. Email: A.Aniss@unsw.edu.au ^
^_______________________________________________________________________^
From ahmada@acsusun.acsu.unsw.edu.auFri Nov 24 12:22:19 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 18:08:06 +1100
From: Ahmad Aniss <ahmada@acsusun.acsu.unsw.edu.au>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: the honourable the wife of list owner
Dear Talismanians,
Dear Linda,
You wrote:
> Dear Ahmad, I fear that I somehow missed the "Seed of Creation" posting. I
> have been trying to follow the discussions between you and Quanta and Derek. I
> did see your statement about leadership being a male thing.
Have no fear I will post it to you direct with pleasure. After all not every
one gets the chance of reminiscence of the " Seed of Creation" with the romantic
hearted lady, the wife of the honourable postmaster of Talisman.
> Did I read this correctly? Or were my eyes playing tricks on me?
In deed your eyes were playing devil's advocate with you. I have no such claim
see my reply to Quanta in this regard.
> Dear Ahamd, I do agree that leadership has been in the hands of men for a long,
> long time, but there are sociological reasons for this. An introductory
> anthropology course would go a long way in explaining why this is so. It would
> also help in understanding that such a situation does not have to maintain
> forever.
Indeed You are right. Yet, when it comes to the manifestations, lesser prophets
and UHJ, they are in a different category. their leadership is bond with Creation
itself. they are mouth pieces of God. they are in an interaction with God. In that
interaction they act as a female entity.
> We now have female leaders. They are found in everything from local
> organizations to nations. I personally find it incomprehensible that women
> in today's world would not be viewed as leaders. There are so many arenas in
> which we act. Here in the U.S. it has only been about 20 years since women
> were permitted to participate in all spheres of life. Women were forcefully
> kept out of all occupations that would have given them the money and clout to
> have influence and to act as leaders. As women enter into every profession, we
> see them "leading."
true indeed.
> However, I concede that this must be very frightening for a lot of men. Linda
Not for all men!
With Baha'i Love and Fellowship,
Ahmad.
_______________________________________________________________________
^ ^
^ Dr. A.M. Aniss, Tel: Home [61(2)] 505 509 ^
^ Bio-Medical Engineer, Work [61(2)] 694 5915 ^
^ Neuropsychiatric Institute, Mobile 019 992020 ^
^ Prince Henry Hospital, Fax: Work [61(2)] 694 5747 ^
^ Little Bay, N.S.W. 2036, ^
^ Australia. Email: A.Aniss@unsw.edu.au ^
^_______________________________________________________________________^
From brburl@mailbag.comFri Nov 24 12:23:02 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 01:11:48 -0600
From: Bruce Burrill <brburl@mailbag.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Buddhist theology
Robert Johnston,
> "Even subtle Baha'i Scriptural analysis brings
forth this same realisation - the ridiculousness if iconic theism is, for
instance, apparent in the Baha'i belief that God is an unknowable
essence..." <
Which is the point: god is, according Baha'i, an unknowable essence,
we, its creation, are quite separate from the essential nature of god, but
from a Buddhist perspective, if are to use god terminology, god is quite
knowable, we being no different in our essential nature from god's
essential nature.
> "While I respect the healthy iconoclasm of Bruce's positions on
Buddhism, I do feel that *experientially* we are talking about pretty-
much the same things. From a purely experiential standpoint we really
cannot tell whether we are of the same nature as God, or a reflection of
that nature, or even of a different nature entirely." <
Cool, but are we talking about the same thing experientially? That is less
than obvious, and experience won't tell us what it is that we experience?
> "Ultimately we rely on Scripture for our ontologies and even
epistemologies. However, each person, whether Buddhist of Baha'i, has
to discover and experience for him or her own self the peace and joy of
approaching her or his Goal." <
And the Scriptures aren't based upon experience?
But your point is quite beside the point of my response to Bev. If Bev
is going to talk about Buddhism using god language, albeit a problematic
exercise, she needs to mirror as accurately as possible Buddhism in the
terms she is using. My point is that she did not, which points to a lack
of understanding.
Your concern about experience could lead to an interesting discussion,
and it seems to be used to brush aside my point, but it is not really what
I was talking about.
> "Bruce seems to assume that
Bahai's have placed an un-necessary theistic veil over the far end of the
corridor (of progressive detachment and purification) towards
enlightenment, but -- as I have said -- experientially this is not
necessarily the case." <
Would you be kind enough to demonstrate that this not necessarily the
case?
> 'Even is each of us conceals the potentials implied by "Thou are
That", we
can nonetheless generally agree that the mortal human body in its
perishing is quite different to that which is Imperishable..... And so on,
and so on...' <
The point is that from a Buddhist perspective that ain't necessarily so.
> "Does Bruce really think that either Buddha or Jesus currently thinks
that
the other got it wrong, or was dealt an inferior hand?" <
What kind of question is this? Currently thinks? Huh, indeed.
Bruce
From ahmada@acsusun.acsu.unsw.edu.auFri Nov 24 12:23:10 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 19:43:09 +1100
From: Ahmad Aniss <ahmada@acsusun.acsu.unsw.edu.au>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: mass conversion of Ahmad
Dear Talismanians,
Dear Derek,
You wrote:
> Once more I am in awe of Sherman's ability to change people. There was
> Ahmad a determined <rumor has almost fanatical > Meat and Potatoes man,
> the diet coming from his Seed of Creation theory. Men who dominant need
> their meat.
> Yet one word from Sherman and he is a proclaimed Veggie.
Not so says Ahmad! He was merely trying to say that if this is your meat diet
I better convert to a vegetarian. After all, the following remarks are
Sherman's own words in regard to his diet:
"Sherman says it reminds him of the time he caught a twelve pound
rodent in the upper meadow . Just carrying that critter to dinner was
a major task . The tail alone was 8.5 inches long , it was big , it was
good , it was dead and it was tasty." 23.11.95
> Ahmad wonders why the young lady who has contacted him <poor child>
> had not read the infamous theory. Simple Ahmad old chap, she works at
>the school. I gave your theory to a series of guests not staff.
No need for cover up my man. What difference makes, if the ladies are staff
or guests? Aren't they all female or is there gender differences attached to
being a staff?
> You wanted exposure to Ladies I offered you the relationship session.
> As all my students know: Hard work killed nobody but it keeps you busy.
> It is a course based on the Writings. The Baha'i dating service as far as I
> am aware has not started up yet. There are some things to be grateful for.
> I have a simple rule once my student always my student so of course you
> would ask for my consent. I do not discriminate in terms of gender as a
> teacher.
Your offer sounds like the offer that was given to Mulla Nasredin, The
famous, in regard to the aroma of the Persian dish "Cholo Kabab". He got
only the aroma and not the Cholo-Kabab.
Perhaps I do need a course in relationships, but I fear it is my luck's and only
that.
Let me say that in Australia we are just started to have a baha'i dating contact.
My dear Derek, life has thought me to be my own teacher, self-teaching is
one of those God's gifts to mankind. But, if I ever become an student of you,
I assure you, you will have a say and you will be mentioned in the will.
>
> By the way Linda E'Mailed me and said how thrilled she was over the
> Talisman cover up plan.
tell me tell me?
> Kindest Regards
> Derek Cockshut
> PS: I told Nancy you were 6ft 3ins weighed 205 lbs had wavy brown hair
> and gray/blue eyes. Looked a little like Tom Cruise with a dash of Paul
> McCartney . Drove a Porsche , had a 42 foot yacht and a beautiful
> beach-front house. Did I do well Ahmad?
Not at all Derek!
What is 6'3'' or 5'9'', you Americans. Here, in Australia and all over the
world we are transformed and made metric. I am a shortie of 1.6 m tall.
Trying hard to have a diet of Meat and Potatoes, so to gain a bit of weight,
I am 53 kg and relatively skinny. Have soft/wavy black hair and brown eyes.
Look a little like Mr. Ben. Do not like Porsche, but drive a red sports car
called Ford Capri, made in Banana Republic. I always wanted a yacht but a
12" dingy would do. One thing you got right that is my Mansion, it is a
beauty, but it is 5 min. drive from the nearest beach, the Botany Bay.
I hope revealing my self in this fashion does not diminish my attractiveness
to those lovely ladies that hopefully are queuing about.
A last advise from the old Hakim to our dearest Sherman is this:
If Sherman wants a proper presentation of his words, he should sack the
humble scribe of his at once, as I usually spend a long time to correct his
humble scribe's postings. Convention says you do not use an space before
characters ", ? : . and so on". Convention says if I go over 79 characters per
line, I will make a mess of the post. Convention says I use two spaces after
a full-stop and use lines between paragraphs. Perhaps the humble scribe is
doing this intentionally for a pay-rise, or to avoid confrontation with repliers.
As I have seen before other posts of this humble scribe with immaculate
grammar
and structure.
With baha'i Love and Fellowship,
Ahmad.
_______________________________________________________________________
^ ^
^ Dr. A.M. Aniss, Tel: Home [61(2)] 505 509 ^
^ Bio-Medical Engineer, Work [61(2)] 694 5915 ^
^ Neuropsychiatric Institute, Mobile 019 992020 ^
^ Prince Henry Hospital, Fax: Work [61(2)] 694 5747 ^
^ Little Bay, N.S.W. 2036, ^
^ Australia. Email: A.Aniss@unsw.edu.au ^
^_______________________________________________________________________^
From rstockman@usbnc.orgFri Nov 24 12:25:28 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 10:55:40
From: "Stockman, Robert" <rstockman@usbnc.org>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: womanifestations
Dear Cary and others: I don't know of anything in the writings
stating that Manifestations have to be male. I assume (for what it is
worth) that in the last 4000 years--all of our known Manifestations
come from the last 4000 years--central Eurasian culture has been so
patriarchal that "womanifestations" would not have been able to
function effectively (by "central Eurasian" I mean the area from
Palestine to India, where the known Manifestations have all come
from). In early, less patriarchal times, female Manifestations might
have managed quite well. Many tribal peoples have "culture heroes"
(as anthropologists call them) who are female, such as the White
Buffalo Calf Woman. Perhaps some of these legendary figures were
Manifestations.
-- Rob
P.S. To all: Sorry I have been off Talisman for about two weeks. The quarter at
DePaul ended and I have had to prepare for the AAR, which left no time for
e-mail at all. I still haven't been able to receive all of Talisman either; my
e-mail is stuck at the moment and will not receive e-mail (though I can send).
I hope to get that fixed tomorrow.
_________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: RE: Re: UHJ, Patriarchy, etc.
Author: caryer@microsoft.com at INTERNET
Date: 11/17/95 10:32 AM
I have always assumed that there have been female Manifestations in the
past, or at the very least, androgynous ones, but that assumption is based
on an intuitive leap and not on scholarship. A similar leap led me to think
that many "gods" and "goddesses" of very ancient cultures are remembrances
of long gone Manifestations and holy ones, perhaps even from preceding
cycles. Many of the figures are so archetypal and universal that it hardly
seems a stretch. However, I wonder if anyone has thought about this in depth
and might comment. Is there anything in the Baha'i writings that explicitly
refutes this? My curiosity in this area is intense.
Your gender-dysphoric colleague and friend,
Cary (C.H.R.)
From rstockman@usbnc.orgFri Nov 24 23:06:51 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 10:55:42
From: "Stockman, Robert" <rstockman@usbnc.org>
To: DEREK COCKSHUT <derekmc@ix.netcom.com>, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Transmutation of Base Metal into Gold.
My understanding of this issue is not quite the same as Derek's,
though similar.
Pressure by itself will not transmute one element into another. Thus
pressure inside the earth, as high as it is, has nothing to do with
transmuting copper to gold.
Elements are transmuted when the number of protons and neutrons in
them are changed. The number of protons determine the element:
hydrogens have one, heliums two, etc. The number of neutrons
determine the isotope; thus carbon 12 has 6 neutrons, carbon 14 has 8
(both having 6 protons).
Using "atom smashers" (a popular term for a wide range of particle
accelerators) it is possible to change the size of nucleii. Usually
it is easiest to add enough protons to a nucleus to create a nucleus
straight below the target atom on the periodic table of elements. The
element immediately below it is often identified by the prefix "eika"
plus the name of the element (Sanskrit for "one"); if the element is
two levels below on the chart it is called "dva" plus the name of the
element (Sanskrit for "two"). It just so happens that silver is
"eika-copper" and gold is "dva-copper," in other words silver is
immediately below copper on the periodic chart and gold is two levels
immediately below copper.
I think I have read that either copper or silver has been transmuted
into gold using particle accelerators. But the cost is indeed
millions of times greater than the value of the gold produced (at
least in current technology).
As for gold in the sea, it is dissolved in sea water in the parts per
million or billion range. Most elementary oceanography textbooks
include a chart and lists the concentration of gold in seawater (I
once taught oceanography and would put part of the chart on the
blackboard). There have indeed been schemes proposed for extracting
it from seawater, but so far the costs are too high.
Rob Stockman
From dawnliqu@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduFri Nov 24 23:11:17 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 14:25:27 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT <dawnliqu@fllab.chass.ncsu.edu>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: gobble-gobble report
I survived. This year thanks to my new name there were no carving
knives after me. So here is the gobble-gobble report of 1995.
After a luncheon at the Baptist Student Center,
sponsored by the Mennonite Community for the international
students at NCSU, I joined a few Baha'is with my African-American
Christian-Minister friend David and, for dinner.
A while later, we all singed to the tune "God is on our side"
led by David. I asked "If God is on Christian side on Sunday,
on Jewish side on Saturday, Muslim side on Friday,
where is He for the rest of the week?" Then, I remembered
he was on our side only once in 19 days. What does this mean?
After dinner to work out our fat turkey, Farzin danced to the tunes
of an arabic melody accompanied by me, in ecstasy he yelled "Ahmad, Oh! seed of
creation". My daughter Ayla's ears perked, "who is that?" she asked.
So, we had to tell her the whole story. Oh my God! what have I done
wrong? Would you believe she is siding with Ahmad on this?
At this point I don't care if she moves to Australia with him and
I will sign the consent form with great pleasure and live happily
thereafter for 50 more years and be out of their way, forever.
In fact, as a deepened Baha'i she might help him with references from
the Writings. David suggested that she get a well paid position for her
great wisdom and eloquence. Ironically though, due to her siding
with Ahmad, I feel like a total failure as a liberated mother, on this one.
But, I am hoping she is going through a temporary rebellion. Otherwise
I'll suspect this may be my divine punishment for questioning Ahmad's
"Seeds of Creation" theory. Go on! spread your seeds of wisdom Ahmad.
As far as Linda's mice story goes; is this experiment not a perfect
example of sexism in science? In fact, I posed this question to one
of my psychology professors who's lecture included this story
along with priest and the nuns experiment. I am sure y'all know it.
A day later he introduced me to his wife in his office saying, "this is the
lady who gives me hard time in the class!" "but deservedly" he added.
So, Robert! you obviously do not know the meaning of "poignant",
if you think you saw a poignant letter from me. Perhaps, I should let
the fingers do the work without hesitation next time, for even better examples.
Farzin will provide you ample share of samples of my oratory work.
Even yet, I will send you a list of my professor's who blow the
trumpet of warning to others a semester in advance. You see,
people seem to prefer chow down thoughts of others into
their cerebral-cortex without asking who cooked this one up,
what are the ingredients, where did they come from, how
does it effect the body, etc. etc. etc. So, when you ask
questions like that to the unprepared mass-production education masters
for the corporate world, they feel threatened. Okay, I am getting off
of my soap box on this one today.
Sorry Bev, for not writing poems lately. Do you ever have times
when you just don't feel like painting? When I am inspired again,
it will be that much more better, I hope. For now, I am enjoying
this straight-talk with Y'ALL. Sorry, folks, PRAYERS PLEASE!
I am taking my cardiovascular pump and cerebral cortex on a
long deserved vacation away from the dangerous mind-fields on
cyberspace. No shrinks, amphetamines nor, tranquillizers for me.
I got no time or $ for greedy pharmaceutical barrons of US
who come up with pills for every unwelcomed human pain.
Goodness, 90% of people in this country is on legal drugs, 25% on
illegal drugs and the rest is on Marx' "opium for the masses". The
figures do overlap of course, some are on all of them
simultaneously, especially religion without its essence.
Just to clarify that, Marx should have included two words
"religion is [used as] opium for the masses", not that the
essence of Divine Religion is an opium for the masses.
It would have gotten him out of the trouble he was in for it.
-THE END OF REPORT-
lovingly,
quanta...(*_*)
From Member1700@aol.comFri Nov 24 23:11:50 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 15:30:17 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Baha'i bill of rights
While I am sure that everyone would like to do without a complicated legal
code involving hundreds of tomes of statues outlining every infraction, I
think that the situation within the Baha'i community that we are dealing with
at the present is that there is no legal standard at all.
At present, a believer's administrative rights may be removed for any
reason at all--as long as the action is taken by the National Assembly.
During the now infamous dialogue affair, when I protested to the National
Assembly that the administrative rights of a believer could be removed only
for violations of Baha'i law (and that none of those sanctioned had violated
any Baha'i law), the National Assembly of the United States sent me a letter
in which they stated that a believer's administrative rights could be removed
whenever the NSA found it "in the interest of the Faith" to do so.
Here we are clearly not talking about law, but expediency.
Tony
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comFri Nov 24 23:12:07 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 13:23:35 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT <derekmc@ix.netcom.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Mass Conversion of Ahmad and next year's Talisman Get together ?
My dear Ahmad
It is alright Sherman gives his advice freely and does not expect
any credit . You said rather than take the diet of two gophers and a
quail a day you would become a Veggie.A feat beyond anybodys
capacity to achieve before . Hence Sherman wins if no human
could change Ahmad's ideas and a pussy cat can what more can
one say. Sherman does not think humans are evolved enough to
feast on large rodents like a rat.
Naturally staff ladies are female just like guest ladies are . I did
not
want the survey to be regarded as biased , so I only asked lady
guests . Any way Ahmad you should be grateful to me , the new
rumor I just heard fifth hand therefore totally true is: no girls in
Australia would talk to you before this . Now Quanta has offered
her beautiful daughter to you and women are E'Mailing you from
Mars . By the way Quanta you should talk to Nima on behalf of
your daughter he also is looking to meet a nice young lady. I mean
as your daughter is going to kill for mentioning her name on
Talisman already why not go wild.
Lets leave old Nasredin out of this , he spent his life chasing Cholo
Kabab . I will leave the ladies to decided if you need a course on
Relationships . However I do find women have a poor opinion of
the average male track record on relationships the grade tends to be
Failed . I will leave it to Burl to comment on the Australian Baha'i
dating service it was no doubt the idea came from my old friend and
student Naysan Faizi who I believe has got himself elected on your
NSA . If you see him give him my love and tell him to contact me
please . I remember Naysan giving his first talk as a 14 year old at
the York Youth Winter School in the UK in the 60's. His great
friend Farshid who lives in Australia now was the Chairman of that
talk. We were trying to train the junior youth in giving talks.
Well Naysan demanded a podium so Farshid made one out of a
cardboard box . Naysan was very proud of the podium and placed
his notes on it . Then he started to speak , leant on the podium and
it folded up . We then had the unusual sight of the speaker beating
the chairman over the head with the flat podium . People laughed so
much that tears just ran , I tried as school chairman to preserve a
sense of decorum and went outside to laugh.
We all need teachers Ahmad so that is why we have the 'infamous'
Seed of Creation theory , you have never had a teacher. I teach
everybody Ahmad that wants me to and some who don't sometimes
, it is an honor to be able to teach .
Actually Linda threatened to get me over the Talisman Cover Up
Plan . I am really frightened about that but my friend Burl says we
must continue to publish the truth regardless of personal cost so on
we go.
Well you may have blown it with some of the ladies Ahmad . I
would point out my description of you in some regions had
flights being booked to down under. Change the car though a
Ford Capri , I remember in England when the first Ford Capri
came out it was a bomb a bit like the Edsel in the States . Get an
Audi or a BMW or go with a Subaru good cars Subaru reliable
etc project a good image for you . Buy some shoes that will help
with the height problem being just over 6 foot myself I have
never had that worry. Do not worry about being underweight that
can help get the ladies to forgive you over Seed of Creation .
Poor lad is starved no wonder he wrote that his brain wasn't
working right . So being underweight is a plus selling point for a
single man. The house is good you will have to post digital
pictures on Talisman or invites us all to the second annual
Talisman Bash at good old Ahmad's . This Year the Hyatt
Regency Hotel SFO next year Little Bay Australia ? it is up to
you Ahmad . Juan I feel sure would be happy to come , David
and I behaved wonderfully to each other at ABS , Burl's new
book will be out by then and other Talisman notables would
delight in flying in. What do you think Gang shall we go to
Ahmad's next year for our annual party ?
One small point of accuracy Ahmad , I am English I just live in
the USA.
As a new user of a keyboard when I type on-line it is different to
off-line as a result postings are sometimes interesting but we are
learning.
Yes a raise would be nice but working here for the Cause is a
bounty and honor that is priceless . I have I regret to say no way to
repay that honor to the Blessed Beauty .
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
From JWALBRID@indiana.eduFri Nov 24 23:13:21 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 16:42:18 EST
From: JWALBRID@indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Misuse of the list
To: Members of the Talisman list
From: John Walbridge, List Owner
An individual at the United States Baha'i National Center has misused the
list and threatened another member of the list. At least one subscriber
was also involved. The members will understand that for both ethical and
legal reasons, I cannot condone such conduct.
1. Since I am unable to identify which subscribers were directly
involved, I am unsubscribing all the members that I know of at the Baha'i
National Center. I will entertain appeals on a case-by-case basis.
2. I am reporting the details of the incident to the relevant officials
here at Indiana University.
From Don_R._Calkins@commonlink.comFri Nov 24 23:13:51 1995
Date: 24 Nov 1995 14:59:24 GMT
From: "Don R. Calkins" <Don_R._Calkins@commonlink.com>
To: mfoster@tyrell.net
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Re: communal prayer
Mark -
Finally, after what seems to be forever, the various beaurocracies have more
or less gotten their acts together and I'm moving. Actually, I have moved
the most important parts, my books and computer. Home is where my Mac is.
8-)
And it is now in Indianola, about 20 miles south of downtown Des Moines.
this has been supposed to happen for over two years, so I'm sure glad that it
finally getting done with.
Anyway - I don't think I was too far off in my post on congregational
prayer.
"You have asked whether it is permissible for the friends to chant a prayer
collectively. there is a difference between chanting a prayer collectively
and congregational prayer. The latter is a formal prayer usually led by an
individual using a prescribed ritual. Congregational prayer in this form is
forbidden except in the case of the Prayer for the Dead. While reciting
prayers in unison and spontaneously joining in the recitation of the Words of
God is not forbidden, the friends should bear in mind the advice of the
beloved Guardian on this subject when he stated that:
'...although the friends are thus left free to follow their own
inclination...they should take the utmost care that any manner they practice
should not acquire too rigid a character, and thus develop into an
institution. This is a point which the friends should always bear in mind,
lest they deviate from the clear path indicated in the Teachings.'"
((from a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to an
individual believer, February 6, 1975, cited in "Lights of Guidance" #1503,
p461, 3rd edition))
It would seem then that any ritualized form of communal prayer, other than
the Prayer for the Dead, is prohibited. This indicates to me that the
practice of some communities of joining hands when singing Allah-u-Abha may
in fact be a ritual that is forbidden by this statement. The key being, I
believe, that this is considered the 'proper' way of doing things.
Don C
He who believes himself spiritual proves he is not - The Cloud of Unknowing
From JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduFri Nov 24 23:14:04 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 16:26:00 EWT
From: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Communal prayer
When discussing this, let me say again that Baha'u'llah did *not* say
"communal prayer"; he said "salat al-jum`a," which is not exactly the same
thing. A more accurate translation would be "collective obligatory prayer."
Singing "Allahu Abha" is *not* salat.
john walbridge
From Member1700@aol.comFri Nov 24 23:15:22 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 15:11:08 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Spilling the beans
I am afraid that the action taken by the National Spiritual Assembly of
Britain in its attempt to have Denis MacEoin's chapter removed from a general
book on comparative religion by representing him to the publisher as an
"enemy fo the Faith" was extremely ill-advised and ineffective. It, in fact,
was a publishing scandal which has become known in academic circles and has
damaged the reputation of the Faith internationally.
I believe that Peter Smith has gathered some information about this
incident and may even have written something about it. If he is still on
Talisman, he may wish to say something about it himself. I believe that it
was he who was on an academic panel with the editor of the volume, some time
later, when the editor publicly accused the Baha'i Faith of advocating
censorship and of being the enemy of academic freedom. It was quite an
embarrassing moment for Peter, and there was--of course--no effective
response.
With regard to Denis's chapter, when the Baha'is raised objections to
it, the publisher was kind enough to offer to have the National Spiritual
Assembly review the piece and present any objections that they had in
writing. But, the NSA (or its representatives) refused to do so, saying that
Denis was an enemy of the Faith and that "anything" that he would write would
ipso facto be regarded as an attack on their religion. So here, the
publisher was presented--NOT with an attempt by a religious community to
correct misinformation about their beliefs and practices--but with an attempt
by that community to blackball a recognized academic and to prevent ANYTHING
he wrote on the Faith from being published.
Such an action was, of course, repugnant in the extreme to the
publisher--as well it should be--and was very, very damaging to the
reputation of the Faith in literary circles in Britain and in this country.
I am a publisher, and I can tell you categorically that such an approach
by the institutions of the Faith would be regarded as unethical and indeed
scandalous by ANY serious publisher and would be resisted in the strongest
possible terms. So here is one situation, guys, where strong-arm tactics
just don't work. As Juan has wisely pointed out, the answer to bad
information about the Faith published by MacEoin and others is to publish
good information about the Faith. Censorship simply isn't going to
work--though it seems (sadly) to be our knee-jerk reaction to anything
unpleasant we find in print.
Tony
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzFri Nov 24 23:15:55 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 11:35:55 +1300 (NZDT)
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: JWALBRID@indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Misuse of the list
Ffolks,
While it is entirely accepted that our esteemed list-owner has a
legitimate right to do with his list as he wishes, it does seem to me that
to punish many for the folly of one is excessively harsh, especially where
the "one" has not been identified. Senders of anonymous email messages are
engaging in childish behaviour, and should not be accorded the same kind of
respect that is given to known correspondents from the United States
Baha'i National Center, and elsewhere. It would be a pity if we could not
give a little more credit here. Doesn't Robert Stockman work for USBNC? It
would be a great pity if his reputation were called into question, and he
were punished concerning a matter in which he has no part.
I question, then, whether it is not in the best interests of the list to
keep lines open. Of course, technically speaking anyone can join the list
(even a barred person), so this form of punitive action may not be
effective anyway.
Best wishes,
Robert.
>To: Members of the Talisman list
>From: John Walbridge, List Owner
>
>An individual at the United States Baha'i National Center has misused the
>list and threatened another member of the list. At least one subscriber
>was also involved. The members will understand that for both ethical and
>legal reasons, I cannot condone such conduct.
>
>1. Since I am unable to identify which subscribers were directly
>involved, I am unsubscribing all the members that I know of at the Baha'i
>National Center. I will entertain appeals on a case-by-case basis.
>
>2. I am reporting the details of the incident to the relevant officials
>here at Indiana University.
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzFri Nov 24 23:16:27 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 12:02:04 +1300 (NZDT)
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: Bruce Burrill <brburl@mailbag.com>, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Buddhist theology
Dear Bruce,
Robert:>> "Bruce seems to assume that
>Bahai's have placed an un-necessary theistic veil over the far end of the
>corridor (of progressive detachment and purification) towards
>enlightenment, but -- as I have said -- experientially this is not
>necessarily the case." <
>
Bruce:>Would you be kind enough to demonstrate that this not necessarily the
>case?
Proof of general enjoyment of a film is evidence of sustained and loud
clapping and laughing. At that time the members of the audience are
pretty-much "at one" with one another, despite their diverse backgrounds.
I shouldn't think that you would disagree with this, would you? In similar
fashion, but in contexts of greater significance, such as when facing death
or in general and particular relationships with fellow human beings, I feel
quite sure that true Buddhist and true Baha'i responses differ little. I
simply do not believe that Buddhists have a nirvana to which Baha'is are
denied access. Do you? (Huh? ;-})
Re., your interrogation of Buddha and Jesus "currently"... Are you telling
me that all Buddhists do not believe in the immortality of the soul?
Robert.
From SFotos@eworld.comFri Nov 24 23:16:46 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 15:28:39 -0800
From: SFotos@eworld.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: rstockman@usbnc.org
Subject: Re: Transmutation of Base Metal into Gold.
Dear Talismans,
Books on astronomy (and those in favor of the Big Bang theory) say that the
cosmic evolution of elements takes place in stars. They start out with only
hydrogen nuclei but through their lives, protons are combined by complicated
reactions into heavier and heavier elements.
First a star is powered by hydrogen burning, but eventually the supply of
hydrogen runs out and the star's core contracts. This contraction heats up
the core and then helium burning begins. Fusion of helium nuclei forms
carbon, oxygen and neon. When this reaction slows down, the core heats up
again, and mangesium, silicon, sulpher and calcium are formed. At this
point, some stars are like onions, sorted into layers, with an iron core
surrounded by shells of other burning elements.
The iron core slows down the reaction. In some stars, the core collapes and
forms a neutron star. The energy produced by this stage drives the synthesis
of all of the other elements: GOLD, silver, mercury, more iron, lead,
iodine, tin, copper. Then the outer layers explode, creating a huge cloud of
newly formed elements. These are blown out into the the universe to provide
the raw material for the formation of a new generation of stars, this time
with planets (since a variety of elements now exist).
Our sun is such a second generation star, formed from elements created by
earlier stars. The atoms making up our planet were formed in stars and so
were the atoms in our bodies. In a sense, a star is just a factory for making
elements. Without stars to make elements, there would be no planets and no
life in our universe
When we read the Writings and prayers where the Manifestion is compared with
the sun, we/I usually think only of the life-giving heat and light. But
maybe we should move back in time in our reflection on this metaphor and
consider that our very composition was derived from previous stars, and so
might our spiritual substance.
Best,
Sandy Fotos
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduFri Nov 24 23:17:02 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 18:26:10 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: a little judgment please
Dear Robert, John was being the epitome of discretion and reserve in posting
the message that he did. I wish you would not label everyone with whom you
have ever disagreed on Talisman as having bricks for brains. John is dealing
with a very sensitive matter here. He has done absolutely nothing to deserve
your unkind and very rash judgment.
Linda
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduFri Nov 24 23:17:34 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 18:36:44 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: the referendum
Derek, I want to let you know that dozens of Talismanians have written to me
expressing their support. They don't know how I endure the unkind remarks you
make about me. For example, one expressed complete confidence in me that I
would not show up at Bosch wearing a white lace dress with pink bows. Tobacco
juice would do dreadful things to it, don't you know?
Yes, I am very touched by all the support I have received. Special thanks to
Cindy, Mike, Dave, Ellen, Susan, Kelly, Ron, Cid, Jason, and many, many others
who said that they actually wept when they saw the scandalous remarks made
about me by Derek and Burl. They thought that someone as obviously sweet and
highly sensitive as I am should not be subjected to abuse. They said that I
never, ever said anything on Talisman that wasn't expressed with the greatest
diplomacy and delicacy and they can't understand why I am always being picked
on. They figure that Derek must be irritable from a severe cat allergy, but
they don't know what on earth can be wrong with Burl. Maybe he gets bad hair
days from going from that barber shop of his.
Linda
P.S. I certainly would not permit a video of me arm wrestling with Burl. I
would never allow Burl to be subjected to so much humiliation. That is just
the kind of person I am.
From rstockman@usbnc.orgFri Nov 24 23:17:52 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 18:32:03
From: "Stockman, Robert" <rstockman@usbnc.org>
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: quick note (AAR)
Dear Linda:
It's too bad you didn't make it to the Baha'i Studies Colloquy at the
AAR. Among our audience were six Philadelphia Baha'is. They had no
problem with the Faith being discussed in academic language either; on
the contrary, they seem to have enjoyed and appreciated the colloquy.
The papers covered a wide ange of subjects, as Richard can testify.
I hope to assemble a report about Baha'i involvement at AAR in the
next few days, and will send a copy to Talisman.
-- Rob Stockman
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: quick note
Author: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu at INTERNET
Date: 11/20/95 9:10 PM
I just returned from the AAR meetings and am exhausted. Have just scanned some
of the many messages awaiting me.
At the conference (where my behavior was impeccable) I attended a session on
Catholicism in America. The presentations were all very scholarly. Yet, many
in the audience were not academics but committed Catholics. I was struck by the
fact that the non-scholarly audience seemed to have no problem with the
objective sorts of presentations given by the speakers. There were no sermons
on faith. The believers were there to gain insights. They did not seemed at
all threatened. I find it remarkable that Catholics seem to have less trouble
with all this than the Baha'is do. . . . . .
From brburl@mailbag.comFri Nov 24 23:18:29 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 19:20:22 -0600
From: Bruce Burrill <brburl@mailbag.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Buddhist theology
> 'Proof of general enjoyment of a film is evidence of sustained and
loud clapping and laughing. At that time the members of the audience
are pretty-much "at one" with one another, despite their diverse
backgrounds.' <
Your assumption is, is that we are looking at the same movie. Are we
watching the same movie? Certainly it doesn't seem to be the case, and
that is the question that underlies the Baha'i claim of unity of religions.
> "In similar fashion, but in contexts of greater significance, such as
when facing death or in general and particular relationships with fellow
human beings, I feel quite sure that true Buddhist and true Baha'i
responses differ little." <
Of course the answer is: it depends. Certainly in traditional Buddhist
culture, a dying Buddhist is hardly likely to pray to what we in the West
call god, and the fact that how I am with a particular human being has
not much to do with the implication that somehow a peak experience
such as obtaining nirvana or entering the 7th Valley are the same. It
seems rather unlikely that they are.
> 'Re., your interrogation of Buddha and Jesus "currently"... Are you
telling me that all Buddhists do not believe in the immortality of the
soul?' <
Would you tell me that _all_ Baha'is don't believe in reincarnation as
accepted by the Hindus. What idiosyncratic Buddhists might believe is
beside the point. Taking Buddhism at is must fundamental level as
preserved the Pali texts and practiced in Theravada countries, of course
they don't believe in an immortal soul. Are you implying by your
"currently" that the Buddha is still around somewhere?
Bruce
From brburl@mailbag.comFri Nov 24 23:22:06 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 19:20:22 -0600
From: Bruce Burrill <brburl@mailbag.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Buddhist theology
> 'Proof of general enjoyment of a film is evidence of sustained and
loud clapping and laughing. At that time the members of the audience
are pretty-much "at one" with one another, despite their diverse
backgrounds.' <
Your assumption is, is that we are looking at the same movie. Are we
watching the same movie? Certainly it doesn't seem to be the case, and
that is the question that underlies the Baha'i claim of unity of religions.
> "In similar fashion, but in contexts of greater significance, such as
when facing death or in general and particular relationships with fellow
human beings, I feel quite sure that true Buddhist and true Baha'i
responses differ little." <
Of course the answer is: it depends. Certainly in traditional Buddhist
culture, a dying Buddhist is hardly likely to pray to what we in the West
call god, and the fact that how I am with a particular human being has
not much to do with the implication that somehow a peak experience
such as obtaining nirvana or entering the 7th Valley are the same. It
seems rather unlikely that they are.
> 'Re., your interrogation of Buddha and Jesus "currently"... Are you
telling me that all Buddhists do not believe in the immortality of the
soul?' <
Would you tell me that _all_ Baha'is don't believe in reincarnation as
accepted by the Hindus. What idiosyncratic Buddhists might believe is
beside the point. Taking Buddhism at is must fundamental level as
preserved the Pali texts and practiced in Theravada countries, of course
they don't believe in an immortal soul. Are you implying by your
"currently" that the Buddha is still around somewhere?
Bruce
From brburl@mailbag.comFri Nov 24 23:22:48 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 19:21:55 -0600
From: Bruce Burrill <brburl@mailbag.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Buddhist theology
Bev,
> 'Yes, I think ANY attempt to understand is good if the intent is pure,
and who are you to question my intent? If I have offended you in my
stumblings, sorry for you.' <
Have I question your intent? Nope. I don't often question intention,
though I sometimes wonder, and, of course, we all know about
intentions, particularly good intentions. And I would add not only is the
road to hell paved with good intentions, it is walled and ceilinged with
them. And you have not offended me.
> 'If you do (just for the sake of argument) take the point of view that
we were created in God's image, (spiritual), then are we not "god"?
Although I am sure that there is a great theological rift between the idea
of a spiritual hierachy between God and Man, (implicit in the analogy
of the gardener and the rose) and the idea of god and man being one and
the same, does it negate the attempt to understand?' <
Does Baha'i say that we are god (God)? If we are created in the image
of god, we certainly are not god, of the same nature as god. At least
being of the same nature as god certainly is not implied in being created
in god's image. As for the attempt to understand, no problem, but part
of understanding is learning and revising.
> 'If the word "God" doesn't fit in with your understanding , what
would you like to label it for the sake of discussion?' <
God is a three letter word used to describe the mystery of existence. The
question I have, why do you need to assume that there is an _it_ that
needs to be labeled?
> 'How can you know what my concept of "god" is? Aren't you
assuming a lot?' <
I have made no assumptions beyond the words that you've used.
> 'You have made assumptions about my "Christian background", and
in part you are right.' <
I made no assumption about your Christian background. I was
responding to the phrase "in the image of God," which is essentially a
Christian phrase.
> 'While it is true that Baha'is regard "that word" as an Unknowable
Essence, it is also true that in the writings "that word" is present in
every atom, every gesture, and every attribute we are capable of
reflecting.' <
Damn, if that doesn't open up a can of worms, I don't know what does.
What does this mean? Not only was god in every one of Hitler's atom's,
but in every gesture and attribute he manifested? But put that aside, I
have been told more than once that from a Baha'i perspective god is one
thing and I am another, like a painter and his painting, and I'll never
know god as the painting will never know the painter.
> "Therefore, we might be lead to believe that we also possess the
"that word" spirit. The writings also suggest that this spirit which
resides within us is our true form of reality.' <
God spirit, which is being the image of god, but not really being of the
same nature as god, my nature and god's nature are undifferentiated,
would you say?
> 'They further suggest that "that word" animates every reality,
physical and spiritual (which covers just about every vapour, rock,
and amoeba that I can think of and those I can't, including the ones
which cause havoc in my stomach when I eat them and all the lovely
little mosquitos and parasites in the world).' <
Again, the HIV virus is animated by god, created by god? Though god
may so animate its creation, that does not say that god's creation is of
the same nature as god's, undifferentiated therefrom.
> 'The writings also talk about "that word" being present in all
things...something I had thought also in the Buddhist "that word".' <
There is still a distinction between god and its creation. If Buddhism
were forced to used god talk, it would have to say that there is
absolutely no distinction between god and its creation.
> 'From this "theological" point of view, both the separateness and the
"sameness" are both true.' <
Your "sameness" does not at all appear to be the same as "god talk
Buddhism's" sameness.
> "I appreciate the difference, but I fail to see the differences between
Baha'i understanding and what you are saying. That is probably due to
my lack of theological training. The obligatory prayer says : "Thou
has't created me to know thee and to worship thee." So, it seems that
Baha'is are also to "Know" "that word". It strikes me that the whole
purpose of what Baha'u'llah revealed is to lead us to that end.
Everything I read in Baha'u'llah's mystical writings suggest that it is our
"that word" nature which Baha'u'llah loves and calls to "as one lover to
his beloved". Is the presence of that nature not implicit in these
statements? If it were not, then who is Baha'u'llah addressing? Surely
he is not addressing our corpulent flesh! And to "worship", to my
way of thinking, is to "honour" that essence, both in ourselves, and in
whatever is within our capacity to appreciate.' <
No matter what you are saying here about knowing, there is still a
separation between god and its creation that is very, very strongly
implied in what you are saying. And if god is an unknowable essence,
how can we really know anything directly, or really at all?
> 'If you are suggesting that we are capable, fully capable, of
occupying the full expanse of "that word" and all the creative powers,
generative ability, and whatever other attributes go into being "that
word", maybe your up to it, but I'm not.' <
And this really points to the serious problematics inherent in the notion
of a god, problematics that Buddhism, by its rejection of such a notion
and the ontology inherent in it, does not have to suffer.
> 'I sure hope you can come up with a different phrase, picture or
combination of letters to use instead of "that word". I will be happy to
oblige.' <
The problem is that the word god and the baggage it carries, really does
not fit Buddhism.
> "I wasn't aware that Buddhism was engaged on drawing as many
separations as you imply. Thank you for the lesson." <
The Buddha had a great deal to say about the extant religious ideologies,
and the church fathers that came after him certainly continued with
commenting on the different notions available to them.
> 'Yours in "that word and all it implies",' <
That's scary.
Bruce
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comFri Nov 24 23:23:11 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 17:41:57 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT <derekmc@ix.netcom.com>
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: The Reeferendum
My dear Linda
As my dear friend Burl is away at some Baha'i rabble rousing affair
something about getting the Baha'i Laity marching on Washington
DC en - mass to claim our rights or something . The response falls
to myself .I was about to reply to my dear friend Juan to explain to
him why he is ill-informed over Mani but that will wait until the
morrow . Once more you have admitted in a private/public forum
your problems . Tobacco is bad for you Linda which is why I
posted to Kathy you would come to Bosch dressed in White lace
and pink bows chewing tobacco. so you intend to come not wearing
White lace and pink bows and still chewing tobacco . John your
much abused spouse <I remember the not well veiled threats to his
well being over that TV program > in a secret as yet unwritten
post asked for help with your tobacco problem in addition to
staining your teeth it does , not the sacred juice that is , make the
flowers grow . That my dear is yet another lie from your friendly
neighborhood cancer dispensing Tobacco company . The people
were weeping with joy my love trust me on this. As for picking on
you .You have 90% of the Talisman males frightened out of their
minds , poor Ahmad only surfaced in 'Billies ' Barby Bar when he
heard you were not going at this juncture to nail him to the wall
over the 'infamous ' Seed Theory . The Baha'i Ladies Ahmad
Hunting Posse are hot on his trail following the oil drips from his
yellow and green Ford Capri . Blue sockinged female Bloomsbury
Intellectuals chewing tobacco are normally unstoppable and not
regarded as highly sensitive and sweet . Even John as you posted
admitted in that long statement of his , he did not know what he
was getting into when you two got married . Burl is prepared to go
into training for the arm-wrestling segment of the Bosch Mystical
Conference . I take it you are now coming to Bosch for the
conference book soon it is filling up.
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
From dann.may@sandbox.telepath.comFri Nov 24 23:28:39 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 22:09:28 -0600 (CST)
From: dann.may@sandbox.telepath.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: BUDDHIST THEOLOGY
B >Bev recently stated: > 'According to my understanding of Buddhism
B >(may I, please, not get stomped on by all the Buddhist sandals in the
B >room), our spirit or soul is created perfect...it is God's image. We
B >practice our spiritual reality, and thereby unpeel layers of "stuff" wh
B >hid that perfection. When we have become fully re-acquainted with our
B >true spiritual nature, this is enlightment. Baha'u'llah refers to the s
B >in the Hidden Words. Might I suggest including some of them in your
B >daily prayers? They really are the perfect affirmation.' <
Bruce > Bev's statement may be good Baha'i or Christian theology, but it is
not good Buddhist "theology."
I concur with Bruce. The Buddhist doctrine of anatta (Pali, Sanskrit
anatman, literally translated as "no soul" or "no self") is one of the most
basic teachings of Buddhism, and I should add, is found in some of the most
ancient scriptures of the Pali canon. This important doctirne makes up what
the earliest Buddhist scriptures call the "Three Great Flaws" or "Signs of
Being" or "Facts of Life" (ti-lakkhana). This is based on the
Anguttara-nikaya 3:14(an important book from the Sutta-Pitaka, one of the
three major collections of the Buddhist scriptures or Tri-pitaka):
1. Anicca Pali; Anitya, Sanskrit: Everything is impermanent, everything is
in a state of flux, of change, becoming, passing away, growth and decay.
There is nothing that is permanent. Put another way, Buddhist metaphysics
is grounded in a "process ontology" as opposed to a "substance ontology"
which is the view more typical of Western thought.
a. "A house of bones is this body, bones covered with flesh and with blood.
Pride and hypocrisy dwell in this house and also old age and death. The
glorious chariots of kings wear out, and the body wears out and grows old;
but the virtue of the good never grows old, and thus they can teach the
good to those who are good." (Dhammapada 11:150-1)
2. Dukkha, Pali; Duhkha, Sanskrit): As a consequence of anicca, all of life
is unsatisfactory, full of pain, suffering, heartache, and evil. What
pleasure exists is fleeting, ephemeral and ultimately unfulfilling.
Dukkha is also the first of the four Noble Truths, which is discussed in
the Buddha's first sermon, the Dhammacakkappattana-sutta or "The Setting in
Motion of the Wheel of the Dharma," in the Samyutta-nikaya.
3. Anatta: There is no ultimate self, no atman especially in the Hindu
sense. This concept is peculiar to Buddhism, and serves to distinguish it
from all other religions and philosophies of ancient India. The doctrine of
anatta is based on the Milindapanha and the Sutta-Pitaka. For instance, in
Samyutta-nikaya 3:66 we read:
"The body, monks, is soulless. If the body, monks, were the soul, this body
would not be subject to sickness . . . . Feeling is soulless . . .
perception is soulless . . . the aggregates are soulless. . .
.consciousness is soulless. . . . Therefore in truth, monks, whatever body,
past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, low or
eminent, near or far, is to be looked on by him who duly and rightly
understands, as, "all this body is not mine, not this am I, not mine is the
soul." (qtd. in Radhakrishnan, Source Book of Indian Philosophy 222-21)
Thus, according to Buddhism, what we in the West call the soul, spirit, or
self is merely the temporary coming together (samussayam) of the five
skandas (heaps or aggregates, Pali khandha):
(1) The physical body
(2) Perception
(3) Feelings and sensations (vedana)
(4) Predispositions, tendencies, inclinations,
genetics--what we generally call the personality.
(5) Consciousness and reasoning
These aggregates are viewed as constantly in the process of change. None
are seen as identical with a permanent self--either taken together or
singly. The concept of anatta, including the five skandas, is very
reminiscent of the thought of the Western philosophers Jean-Paul Sartre,
William James, and especially David Hume.
Warmest greetings, Dann May, Philosophy, OK City Univ.
---
* WR 1.32 # 669 * A wise man hears one word and understands 2. Jewish prove
From osborndo@pilot.msu.eduSat Nov 25 00:05:05 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 13:49:43 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Zhang Osborn <osborndo@pilot.msu.edu>
To: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
Cc: Talisman@Indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Tolerant vs. Righteous on Talisman?
Juan wrote (on 11-8-95):
>with regard to Tarazat 2, Baha'u'llah counsels "tolerance" and
>"righteousness," as you say.
>
>The Persian is burdbari, which is defined by my dictionary as "patience,
>forebearance, fortitude"; and nikukari, which means literally "doing good."
>While forbearance is desirable in most situations, however, Baha'u'llah
>and `Abdu'l-Baha were quite intolerant of injustice and denounced it in
>the most intemperate language more than once. In SAQ `Abdu'l-Baha even
>says that anger is good if it is directed against tyranny. It is not
>even entirely clear to me how one can "do good" while countenancing
>injustices.
Allah'u'abha Juan and all! Thanks for the Persian original terms. Are
the same terms used in the Lawh-i-Maqsud?
Tarazat 2 of course deals with how to interact with members of other
religions (and as such would be interesting to discuss in the context of
the (stillborn) thread on interfaith dialogue). My purpose in bringing it
up was more amply fulfilled by Kevin's posting on "a revolution of
reconciliation."
You are right of course that one cannot countenance injustice (after all,
justice is the "most beloved" of all things in the sight of God). Moreover,
inasmuch as fire and water cannot exist in the same spot and friend and foe
cannot abide in the same heart, doing good and patience with injustice
would seem to be an example of an "either/or" scenario. Yet might it may be
more complex than that?
On an individual level, as I understand it, we are to show forbearance with
each other, and "be not offended" by anyone. Yet Abdu'l Baha's description
of how to treat violence against another (i.e., intervene to stop it) may be
the guiding principle of how to treat injustice we see perpetrated by one on
another.
On the institutional level there is a clear difference between instances of
injustice from outside and within the Baha'i community. In neither case is
injustice acceptable, but in the latter, the institutions are part of us.
They both aspire to a higher order of justice and deserve a higher order of
allegience (hence it is natural to react more strongly when things don't
seem to meet our expectations and feel frustrated because the ways in which
we might speak out against perceived injustice from old world order
institutions are not appropriate).
Within the Baha'i community, one might be forebearing in the instance of
what one perceives as an injustice perpetrated against oneself, trusting
that in the proper operation of consultation, and in time, either the error
will be corrected or the wisdom of the decision will become apparent. Yet in
three other situations the course of action may not be so clear: perceived
injustice against 1) a specific group of people including oneself, 2) a class
or category of people including oneself (e.g. scholars), and 3) some group or
class/category which does not include oneself. What is/are the best courses
of action given that one loves both justice and the Baha'i institutions? How
can one serve the interests of justice to those involved, the long term
evolution of a system functioning in the name of justice, and the continued
unity of the community? These questions may in some measure be addressed
in threads on Talisman which I have not followed closely, but it seems that
there will be no easy answers and that the questions will be with us for some
time as the Baha'i community grows and develops.
Don Osborn osborndo@pilot.msu.edu
Dept. of Resource Development (Ph.D. student)
Michigan State University
"This Wronged One exhorteth the peoples of the world to observe tolerance and
righteousness, which are two lights amidst the darkness of the world and two
educators for the edification of mankind. Happy are they who have attained
thereto and woe betide the heedless." Tarazat (Tablets of Baha'u'llah, p. 36)
"... The heaven of true understanding shineth resplendent with the light of
two luminaries: tolerance and righteousness.
"O my friend! Vast oceans lie enshrined within this brief saying.
Blessed are they who appreciate its value, drink deep therefrom and grasp its
meaning, and woe betide the heedless." Lawh-i-Maqsud (Tablets of Baha'u'llah,
p. 170)
From rvh3@columbia.eduSat Nov 25 00:05:55 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:29:56 -0500 (EST)
From: Richard Vernon Hollinger <rvh3@columbia.edu>
To: "[G. Brent Poirier]" <gpoirier@acca.nmsu.edu>
Cc: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>, StrayMutt@aol.com, Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Baha'i Bill of Rights/criminal code
On Tue, 21 Nov 1995, [G. Brent Poirier] wrote:
> I have mixed feelings about a comprehensive list of sanctionable offenses.
> On the one hand, if I were going to lose something so precious, I would
> want every opportunity for fairness, and as a lawyer, we are trained to
> make sure that the offense is actually proscribed in the language of the
> law.
>
> On the other hand, doesn't that lead to prolixity? Doesn't this
> inevitably lead to massive tomes, and written opinions distinguishing
> this incident from that one, and the development of more "regulations" as
> the Guardian said, and an over-emphasis on legalisms, which he
> discouraged at the present time?
>
> Where is the balance? On the one hand, of course we don't want
> deprivations of rights based on whim. On the other hand, we don't want,
> or at least *I* don't want, the cases where technical imperfections in
> statute-drafting result in injustices either way...[stuff deleted]
Brent, I share your concerns, both of which, I think, have a basis in the
Baha'i writings and the writings of the Guardian. On the one hand
Baha'u'llah did not hold in high esteem the legalism of the Shi'ism and
surely did not want legalistic nitpicking to occupy the energies of his
own community. On the other hand, he placed the highest value on
justice, and justice according to the Baha'i as well as other
definitions, would seem to require written laws, for two reasons. First,
in Baha'i jurisprudence, ignorance is of the law is a valid defense.
The enforcement of Baha'i law cannot, therefore, take place in any
meaningful way without these laws being written, published, and
promulgated. Unwritten laws, it seems to me, have not only been out of
fashion for a number of centuries, but are contrary this principle of
Baha'i jurisprudence. Baha'u'llah wrote down the laws that he revealed
and had them published in his own lifetime, and, it seems to me, the
institutions that were established on the basis of his writings would be
well-advised to follow his example. It is true that the entire Kitab-i
Aqdas was not widely circulated in the Western Baha'i community until
recently, but this principle was upheld by circulating information about
all of the law that were to be enforced within the Western Baha'i
community.
A second principle of Baha'i jurisprudence that is indirectly related to
written law is that of equality before the law. According to this
principle, elucidated by `Abdu'l-Baha, it would be an injustice to
enforce a law in an unequal way--at least this is my understanding of its
implications. How could it ever be determined if laws were enforced
equally, rather than selectively, if they are not written and published?
Although I think the Baha'u'llah, `Abdu'l-Baha, and Shoghi Effendi all
wished to avoid an overly-legalistic bureaucracy with a mass of rules and
regulations, each of them put their own legislation and judicial
decisions in writing, and, when they had implications for the generality
of the Baha'i community, they had them circulated. Hence, I don't think
that having a written code of laws necessarily has to result in massive
tombs of legislation. I would hope not, anyway.
Having said that, I am not sure that these kind of legal reforms are
really going to bring about the results their advocates seek. From the
perspective of efficient administration, I think it would be useful for
NSA's in large national communities to develop better record keeping
systems for the documents that state their official policies and various
matters--many organizations have numbered administrative or
policy memoranda that are periodically reviewed and updated. This would
avoid the embarassing and confusing situation of have contradictory
policy statements without anyone necessarily knowing about more than one
of them, or, if they do, knowing which one is in effect. But, while I
certainly do not opppose the idea of putting in writing those offenses
for which a person may be deprived of his/her adminsitrative rights, or
any of the other reforms suggested here, they all seem to me to be geared
to reform a different kind of administrative system than the one we have.
It is my opinion that, unlike parliamentary democracies as they have
evolved in Europe and North America, Baha'i administration is very
delicate and is based on different assumptions about the human character
of the elected and the electorate. While the former are rooted in the
assumptions that everyone will have the tendency to pursue personal
self-interests in all social positions--hence the need for checks and
balances to minimize individuals' and factions' ability to abuse their power
and privilege--the Baha'i system is based on the assumption that
individuals in all positions can transcend their personal and corporate
interests, at least to some extent, for the greater good. Perhaps the
Baha'i ethos incorporates the anachronistic notion of enlightened
self-interest. At any rate, while the adverserial politics that have
evolved in Western democratic systems may mitigate some of the worst
abuses of power, they have also made effective leadership a rare
commodity. Now, I do not intend to set up Baha'i administration, as it
is currently practiced, as a model that the nations of the world should
emulate, but I don't think it will be very useful to import
refroms from these other systems either.
In my view, the reform that is imperative for the effective fucntioning
of Baha'i administrative institutions is the development of a culture
in which certain standards of conduct are upheld through unwritten rules
and peer pressure. Let's face it, the Baha'i system of administration is
more easily abused by corrupt persons in positions of power than Western
democratic systems. But such persons are not, for the most part, going
to be constrained by constitutions, by-laws, or bills-of-rights. To reform
Baha'i administration, we have to develop a culture in which it is
unthinkable, dishonorable, and shameful to use positions of power with
the slightest taint of self-interest. In such a culture, it might
become customary for assembly members to recuse themselves during
consultation over something in which they have a personal interest, for
example. In the absence of such generally accepted standards of personal
conduct, which would make many current practices simply unthinkable, Baha'i
administration may, at times, be worse than Western democratic
systems. In short, I think it is cultural change and moral reform that
will be the more effective agent for improving the functioning of Baha'i
administrative institutions.
Richard Hollinger
From osborndo@pilot.msu.eduSat Nov 25 00:06:53 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:51:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Zhang Osborn <osborndo@pilot.msu.edu>
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Messengers/Hijack?!/personal note
Allah'u'abha! In an earlier posting I mentioned how the Baha'i
teachings of progressive revelation allow people to accept and love
Manifestations of all religions (to which one might add Apostles, Seers,
saints/walis etc.). There is another dimension as well. Long after I
became a Baha'i, while doing some geneological work, I realized that the
Baha'i teachings also allow me to accept the validity / Divine origins
of beliefs of my long-ago pre-Christian European ancestors as well.
(Since my family name is the Anglicization of the Danish As-bjorn or
sacred bear, I am especially aware of (if not well informed about) my
connection with pre-Christian Scandinavians who invaded England and
occupied an area known as the Danelaw or Danelaugh a century before the
Norman conquest.)
In effect, thanks to Baha'u'llah, I am able to reconcile these long
forgotten beliefs with Christianity better than the intervening
generations of my Christian ancestors could (Christian teaching in
Europe as in contemporary Africa and elsewhere tends to discredit
traditional belief systems). So the current discussion on Manifesta-
tions, Native American Messengers, and the Call of God also has
implications for the long ago religion(s) of pre-Christian Europe.
One might also extend the discussion to other parts of the world. For
instance, in ancient China, what ancient Messages gave rise to
traditional (pre-Taoist, pre-Confucian) beliefs, parts (?) of which are
now known as Feng-Shui (lit., wind & water, a belief system aiming at
reconciling our acts with those of unseen spirits)? In Africa, people
also ask if there were any African prophets (I read something brief on
this in a compilation of writings by Amadou-Hampate Ba).
Incidentally, one might imagine that people in Indonesia, which was once
mainly Hindu and is now predominantly Muslim, might be especially
receptive to the Baha'i message of progressive revelation. Is there not
some degree of cultural schizophrenia that comes when a people accepts
a religious message that (appears to) deny the validity of the beliefs
of their ancestors?
Don Osborn osborndo@pilot.msu.edu
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduSat Nov 25 00:07:03 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:58:01 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT <DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.edu>
To: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Peace by 2000? What is that!
Dear Bev,
Is that me speaking in you? I live in US and do not envy me.
I know of many converted american sisters in our Faith who have been
so brutalized by unspeakable horrors from childhood on,
that one even have the tendency to stab herself out of anger.
I know of some who were victims of multiple crimes, rape,
incest, sexual harassment, molestation who either turn their
anger inward or outward to society. This is no heaven my dear.
They find no comfort from their fellow believers, for they are
ashamed of being the victims of these horrors and blame
themselves. Why did I deserve this? is their painful question.
I believe it is more painful to suffer in a country that prides
itself with having so much of everything. It is like suffering
of Sisyphus of Tantalus without deserving their punishment.
But, I hear and feel your pain and those of others as well.
Political peace does not have a trickling down effect on the
millions of innocent people, yet. Think of the champagne
glass, the top has the most and the bottom practically nothing.
Trickling down is not enough!
Baha'is are in a state of empathy, not compassion. I have not seen any descripti
on
in the prayers which says "O Thou Most Empathizer!" It is always "The Most Compassionate!"
Do we understand the difference? In my experiences, NO!!
This is what I have been told by two young men from India and
Costa Rica who have relatives and close associates as Baha'is,
"Baha'is are good at intellectual stuff, but I don't see them
full of love and compassion for others". Although, they like
the "ideas" they decided to become Christians instead, where
they found more caring and a place where they also could
systematically and individually put their compassion to work.
I am sorry, if I added more salt and pepper to your wounded heart.
Please forgive me.
lovingly,
quanta...(*_*)
From HICKC89@ollamh.ucd.ieSat Nov 25 00:07:45 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:38:28 +0000 (GMT)
From: Vivien Hick <HICKC89@ollamh.ucd.ie>
To: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: spilling the beans
Juan wrote:
> What MacEoin does not report here is that he wrote a chapter for the
> Penguin Handbook of Living Religions on the Baha'i Faith, and thatsome
> members of the UK NSA attempted to intervene with J.R. Hinnells, the
> editor and a prominent Persianist, and with Penguin, not to publish it.
> Hinnells now has an extremely low opinion of the Baha'i Faith.
Dear Juan,
The NSA of the UK had not only a right but a duty to attempt to
intervene on behalf of the Baha'i Community in Britain, since MacEoin
is recognised for his anti-Baha'i polemic. He sets himself up as
*the* authority on the Faith (which according to recent citation
statistics he certainly is not), and the National Assembly had a responsibility
to attempt to rectify the bias against the Faith that was obviously going to be
introduced in this quite widely distributed book. I do not see
anything wrong in their attempted intervention. Naturally they may
have gone about it in the wrong way, but the intervention itself was
completely justified.
D.
Darach Watson,
Dept. of Exp. Physics,
UCD,
Ireland.
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 22:56:26 -0800
From: an assistant to the auxiliary board
To: jrcole@umich.edu
Subject: RE: RE: Re: Baha'i Bill of Rights/criminal code
Juan,
The facts of the case were related to me by . . .,
a member of the National Spiritual Assembly in question,
and are rather unremarkable. The location was a south-
east Asian country (I don't know which one), where a
pioneering American women got pregnant.
Interestingly enough, . . . relates another case (I
don't know if it was the same NSA), where a woman's
rights were revoked for the very same thing. In this
case, the decision of the NSA was upheld.
The difference between the two cases? The attitudes
of the individuals involved. One was repentant, the
other was willfull misconduct (the facts made it
rather clear).
I have a message from the Universal House of
Justice, to a National Spiritual Assembly, which
discusses applications of Baha'i Law. I'll endeavor
to type it in over the next couple of days or so. It
might give you a great deal of insight into the
various cases that are involved.
By the way, there is no Baha'i case law. Every
case is considered on its own merits. That's one
of the distinguishing characteristics of the
Administrative Order.
Warmest Regards,
----------
From: Juan R Cole[SMTP:jrcole@umich.edu]
without sharing any identifying details such as names, would you be
willing to say more about the reversal of the NSA by the House to which
you referred? What were the grounds the NSA thought it should be able to
proceed on, and why did the House refuse to accept them? Shouldn't this
case become part of Baha'i case-law so everyone's time is not wasted by
it happening again?
thanks - Juan
From osto4159@tao.sosc.osshe.eduSat Nov 25 00:22:42 1995
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 12:34:12 -0800 (PST)
From: Maziar Ostovar <osto4159@tao.sosc.osshe.edu>
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: bahai-teachers@bcca.org
Dear Friends,
I have been silently "lurking" on Talisman for several weeks, and in
that time I have been extremely impressed with the knowledge, insight and
intellectual caliber of the members of this excellent forum. This being
the case, I would humbly ask if anyone would care to share their insight
into the issue of the punishment for adultery as stated in the
Kitab-i-Aqdas. Specifically, I am a bit confounded as to how to
understand and make sense of the note attached to paragraph #49 which
states that:
a) Adultery as defined by Baha'u'llah actually refers to unmarried sex
(this is not that hard for me to grasp).
b) The purpose of the punishment as stated by the Master in one of His
tablets is "the exposure of the offenders- that they are shamed and
disgraced in the eyes of society." (This is the confusing part for me).
The exact reference is as follows:
" Although the term translated here as adultery refers, in its
broadest sense, to unlawful sexual intercourse between
either married or unmarried individuals (see note 36 for a
definition of the term), Abdu'l-Baha has specified that the
punishment here prescribed is for sexual intercourse
between persons who are unmarried. He indicates that it
remains for the Universal House of Justice to determine the
penalty for adultery committed by a married individual.
(See also Q and A 49.)
In one of His Tablets, Abdu'l-Baha refers to some of
the spiritual and social implications of the violation of the
laws of morality and, concerning the penalty here described,
He indicates that the aim of this law is to make clear to all
that such an action is shameful in the eyes of God and that,
in the event that the offence can be established and the fine
imposed, the principal purpose is the exposure of the
offenders - that they are shamed and disgraced in the eyes of
society. He affirms that such exposure is in itself the
greatest punishment.
The House of Justice referred to in this verse is
presumably the Local House of Justice, currently known as
the Local Spiritual Assembly."
(Baha'u'llah: Aqdas: Notes, page 200)
I had essentially thought that the basic principle which operates in
regard to individual wrongdoing is that we should overlook and even
disguise the faults and misdeeds of our fellow believers. In many quotes
Baha'u'llah seems to refer to the fact that "God -exalted be His glory-
whisheth not the humiliation of His servants". Similarly, neither should
we, imperfect as we are, dare to "breath the sins of others so long as
thou are thyself a sinner" for fear of being "accursed". The Master as
well talks often about the need to overlook the faults of others and the
devastating affects of faultfinding and/or backbiting on the individual
soul, as well as on the Baha'i community. Specifically I am wondering:
1) Does anyone know exactly which tablet of Abdul'Baha's is being
referred to in the notes section of the Aqdas?
2) Assuming that the tablet has not been translated into English,
would anyone be able to translate and post all or sections of it that
deal with this issue?
3) Why shame, and public exposure of a misdeed, is, in this case, the
law of God, where in most others it seems to be strictly forbidden?
4) If the crime of sexual intercourse outside of marriage is so
serious as to merit
"a fine on every adulterer and
adulteress, to be paid to the House of Justice: nine
mithqals of gold, to be doubled if they should repeat
the offence. Such is the penalty which He Who is the
Lord of Names hath assigned them in this world; and in
the world to come He hath ordained for them a
humiliating torment." (Aqdas, pages 37-38)
how are we to explain this to our non-Baha'i peers; specifically in
light of the statement by Shoghi Effendi that the Faith must not be
confused with "excessive and bigoted puritanism"?
5) What is the beneficial effect of shaming a pair of individuals?
Specifically in light of the following references (which are only a few
of many that I have collected, but in the interests of being fairly
brief, I will only share one per point) that seem to state that God
desires to hide our misdeeds even when they cause Him great pain and
furthermore He forbids us to bring shame to one another, or even to bring
shame to ourselves through confession of sins:
O SON OF DUST!
All that is in heaven and earth I have ordained
for thee, except the human heart, which I have
made the habitation of My beauty and glory; yet
thou didst give My home and dwelling to another
than Me; and whenever the manifestation of My
holiness sought His own abode, a stranger found
He there, and, homeless, hastened unto the sanctuary
of the Beloved. Notwithstanding I have concealed
thy secret and desired not thy shame.
(Baha'u'llah: Persian Hidden Words, page 27)
Every time My name "the All-Merciful" was told
that one of My lovers had breathed a word that
runneth counter to My wish, it repaired, grief-stricken
and disconsolate to its abode; and whenever
My name "the Concealer" discovered that one of My
followers had inflicted any shame or humiliation on
his neighbor, it, likewise, turned back chagrined and
sorrowful to its retreats of glory, and there wept and
mourned with a sore lamentation. And whenever My
name "the Ever-Forgiving" perceived that any one
of My friends had committed any transgression, it
cried out in its great distress, and, overcome with
anguish, fell upon the dust, and was borne away by
a company of the invisible angels to its habitation
in the realms above.
(Baha'u'llah: Gleanings, pages 308-309)
The ninth Glad-Tidings
When the sinner findeth himself wholly detached and
freed from all save God, he should beg forgiveness and
pardon from Him. Confession of sins and transgressions
before human beings is not permissible, as it hath never
been nor will ever be conducive to divine forgiveness.
Moreover such confession before people results in one's
humiliation and abasement, and God - exalted be His
glory - wisheth not the humiliation of His servants. Verily
He is the Compassionate, the Merciful.
(Baha'u'llah: Tablets of Baha'u'llah, page 24)
6) I am wondering how this law, and the laws regarding sexuality in
general can be more consistently understood in relation to the entire
body of the Writings as opposed to prevailing cultural understanding?
Specifically with an eye towards practically translating this knowledge
into healthy attitudes to guide our actions, as well as an eye towards
explaining this while teaching the Faith. (I am intentionally being broad
here, as I would welcome a broad range of thoughts, and would simply like
to start a discussion here which I have had off and on for many
years in other parts of the Baha'i community).
7) Lastly, how can this law and the attitude towards sex and
sexuality in the Writings be seen in terms of modern social ideas and
attitudes (from many different cultures if possible)? Specifically, I am
looking for things that may seem similar but can in fact be antithetical to the
spirit of Baha'i law (like, in my opinion, the North American tendency
to judge and reject members of a religious community who are seen to be
acting against social strictures), as well as things which may truly be a
point of unity and understanding between the Faith and other religions or
social groups.
In concluding this rather long post, I would like to thank those who
are reading this message and giving your precious time and thought to it.
I am writing this with a deep sense of devotion to Baha'u'llah and all of
His laws and exhortations, and it is my sincere and personal wish to
understand this issue for my own growth, and to be able to explain it at
least somewhat reasonably to my friends in college who are investigating
the Faith (and those who are opposing it as well). Also, as according to
Talisman tradition, I will shortly post an abbreviated biography
of myself.
Love and thanks,
-Maziar Ostovar
From 72110.2126@compuserve.comSat Nov 25 00:23:31 1995
Date: 14 Nov 95 17:49:24 EST
From: David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com>
To: JRCole@umich.edu
Subject: NSA Threat
This morning I received the following letter via registered mail
from the National Spiritual Assembly. I'd be very grateful for
your advice and suggestions, privately of course, on how to
respond. [Feel free to send an E-mail at Internet
72110.2126@compuserve.com; or call at 1-800-950-2647, extension 720
during office hours or at home, 1-310-326-8900.]
*Dear David,
The National Spiritual Assembly has received a copy of your
Talisman network email of October 1, 1995 in which you describe how
your pilgrimage invitation was withdrawn in 1988 and you were asked
to cancel your scheduled visit to the Holy Land. The National
Assembly is concerned that you have lied in your posted recount of
this matter and have created the appearance that, in conveying its
instructions to you, the Secretary-General acted without the
approval of the Universal House of Justice and the knowledge of the
National Spiritual Assembly. We remind you that, in its cable of
May 13, 1988, the National Assembly informed you that it was acting
in accordance with the specific instructions of the Universal House
of Justice.
The National Assembly feels that you are obligated to post a
correction to your October 1, 1995 message and instructs you to do
so within two weeks from the receipt of this letter or face
administrative sanctions on your good standing as a Baha'i.
Moreover, the National Assembly is deeply concerned about your
repeated pattern of criticizing and attacking the Baha'i
institutions while professing loyalty to them. Such behavior is
not only contrary to the basic teachings and principles of our
beloved Faith, it also endangers your own spiritual progress and
well-being.
In its letter of December 29, 1988 concerning individual rights and
freedoms within the Baha'i community, the Universal House of
Justice sets forth the principles which should guide a believer's
right of self-expression and the appropriate channels for offering
criticism. The House of Justice reminds the friends of the
Guardian's advice, as conveyed by his secretary, that "all
criticisms and discussions of a negative character which may result
in undermining the authority of the Assembly as a body should be
strictly avoided. For otherwise the order of the Cause itself will
be endangered, and confusion and discord will reign in the
community." The National Assembly encourages you to read this
letter again, reflect deeply upon its guidance and cease your
tendency to criticize and insist upon an accounting from the Baha'i
institutions.
The National Spiritual Assembly will offer its prayers that the
deep love which you profess to hold for Baha'u'llah and His Cause
will strengthen you to accept and carry out the guidance of His
institutions in the spirit of obedience and radiant acquiescence.
With loving Baha'i greetings,
National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States
(signed)
Robert C. Henderson,
Secretary General
cc: The Universal House of Justice
The Continental Board of Counselors for the Americas*
My love
David
From sbedin@gov.nt.caSat Nov 25 00:24:08 1995
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:21:55 MST
From: Stephen Bedingfield <sbedin@gov.nt.ca>
To: Talisman <talisman@indiana.edu>, Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
Subject: Baha'i Zen comment/corrections
Warmest greetings Juan and Friends,
Yes, I slowly emerge from the veil of lurking. There are so many topics on
Talisman that I wish I could actively participate in, but time does not allow.
However, Juan's posting of his provisional translation of *Commentary on 'He
who knoweth his self hath known his Lord'* was marvellous and I wanted to
comment.
For a few years now, based on my personal model (understanding) of reality I
have come to believe that our souls actually exist in both this contingent
world and the world to come (the Abha Kingdom) simultaneously. Only the veil
of spiritual immaturity and self allows this space/time continuum to dominate
our reality. Okay, I know this sounds real flakey, but I am not interested in
whether this model is good or bad, but only if it is useful.
Now when I read Juan's introduction which referred to "The believer is alive in
both worlds" my heart literally skipped a beat. Upon reading the paragraph
dealing with this saying... well, floating away may not be too far from the
truth.
Anyway, I have posted below some typo corrections of Juan's splendid work
(indicated by left arrows on separate lines).
Thanks again Juan.
________(start of corrected typos: CORRECTIONS INDICATED BY LEFT ARROWS)____
[If thou wert to ascend the stages of reliance upon God and
detachment by means of the ladders of glory and inaccessibility, and if
thou wert to open thy spiritual eye, thou wouldst see this utterance as
an abstract truth, free of the limitations of self. And thou wouldst hear
the words, "Whoso hath known any thing hath known his Lord" in the
ear of thy consciousness through the angelic call of the divine dove of
holiness. For in all things is present and visible the sign of the
effulgence of the self-subsistent Glory and the rays of the manifestation
of the unique Sun. This sign is not and never shall be confined to any
one soul. This is the truth, and no doubt lies therein, if you be among
those who know. But the primary intent of knowing the self in this
station is the knowledge of the Self of God in every era and age. For
the pre-existent essence and the ocean of reality is exalted above the
knowledge of all else but Him. Therefore, the insight attained by all
the mystics actually hath reference to their insight into the
Manifestations of His Cause. They are the Self of God among His
servants, His Manifestation in His Creation, His Sign among His
creatures. Whoso knoweth them hath known god, whoso hath
Them God <----------
affirmed them hath affirmed God, whoso hath acknowledged Their
Them <----------
truth hath acknowledged the signs of God, the Help in Peril, the
Everlasting. Thus do We reveal for you the signs, that you might be
guided by the Signs of God.
O Hadi, follow the guidance of God, thy Lord and the Lord of
all things. Then gird up thy loins to aid the Cause of God. Do not
follow those who took pharaoh's magician, Samiri, as their friend
instead of God, who ridicule the verses of God and are of the
transgressors. And when the verses of thy Lord are recited to them,
they say, "These are veils."
Say: By virtue of what word have you believed in god, your
God <----------
Lord? Produce it, if you speak the truth. Now, matters have reached
such a pass that, by Him Who holds my soul in His hands, all who are
in the heavens and on earth weep and wail with the eye of mystery at
how this Servant is oppressed. We have relied upon God, Our Lord
and the Lord of all things. I shall ever view all who are in the world as
nothing but a handful of dust, save for those who have entered into the
depths of the love and knowledge of God. Thus do we remind thee,
that though mightest be among they who know.
thou <----------
As for thy question concerning the Saying, "The believer is
alive in both worlds:" Yes, that is a truth, like the existence of the sun,
which shone forth in this atmosphere, which hath appeared in this sky,
which subsisteth in this Cloud of the Unseen, if thou art among those
who know. Indeed, wert thou to be steadfast in thy love for thy Lord
and to attain that station wherein thou shalt never stumble, there
would appear from thee that whereby both worlds would be revivified.
This is revelation from the Mighty, the All-Knowing. Then thank God
for having given thee to drink from this spring, which giveth new life
to the spirits of the Near Ones; for having lifted the up in truth; and for
thee <----------
having revealed to thee those Words whereby the proof of God to all
the worlds was perfected. By God, if a drop thereof were bestowed
on the people of the heavens and the earth, thou wouldst find them all
subsisting in the eternity of thy Lord, the Mighty, the Powerful.]
________(end of corrected typos)____________________________________________
And REMEMBER: Baha'u'llah wants us to become detached, but not unhinged :-)
Loving regards,
stephen
--
Stephen R 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
From belove@sover.netSat Nov 25 11:01:14 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 17:35:28 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Spilling the beans.
Applause, appluase for candor.
I really hope we are challenging a norm, here. (Sorry to any Norms,
out there lurking, I mean norm with a lower case n.)
This is a tricky issue.
As a defender of free speech, I want to also say that I believe it
really is possible to be wrong about something. I'm not saying any
belief is okay, only that anything may be said.
I am convinced that those who believe it is dangerous or heretical to
speak in certain ways, or to hear certain things about the faith,
also conduct their personal affairs in a similar manner.
I'm sure that, there are marriages that work perfectly well with the
shared agreement to never discuss certain "upsetting" matters ---
whatever they might be in that particular marriage.
But clearly, there are other marriages that would shrivel and die or
explode under that same rule structure.
So there is a range of reasonable and productive positions on this
issue... as long as those positions aren't institutionalized.
One person's decorum is another person's repression. That is why so
many these day fear institutionalized religions.
Sweet, but not too sweet wishes,
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
From belove@sover.netSat Nov 25 11:01:57 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 23:35:33 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>,
talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: intuition, compassion, "intellectual stuff"...
On Thu, 23 Nov 1995 14:44:36 -0900 Robert Johnston wrote:
>talismaidenic Quanta wrote:
>
>>Baha'is are in a state of empathy, not compassion. I have not seen
any
>>description
>> in the prayers which says "O Thou Most Empathizer!" It is always
"The
>>Most Compassionate!"
>>Do we understand the difference? In my experiences, NO!!
>>This is what I have been told by two young men from India and
>>Costa Rica who have relatives and close associates as Baha'is,
>>"Baha'is are good at intellectual stuff, but I don't see them
>>full of love and compassion for others". Although, they like
>>the "ideas" they decided to become Christians instead, where
>>they found more caring and a place where they also could
>>systematically and individually put their compassion to work.
>
>
>Some notes:
>
>(1) The body of Christendom wasn't torn apart by an excess of
compassion.
>(That's what I would tell these two young men!)
>
>(2) Is it not possible that there is a shorter distance between
empathy and
>compassion than there is between "intellectual stuff" and empathy..?
>However, it would seem to me that if this is clearly true it may be
only
>because "intellectual stuff" is much less than a genuinely
scientific
>presence.
>
>(3) Should we not strive to acquire intelligent and understanding
hearts?
>Do you not think we should try to realise the true unity science and
>love..?
>
>(4) True empathy is wonderously scientific, entailing complete
>identification with the object of perception. Without this kind of
>understanding how is genuine compassion possible?
>
>love,
>
>Robert.
>
>
>
>
>
I really like the idea of trying to parse out the differences between
empathy, compassion and scientific thought, or intellectual stuff.
In Jung's model of the four functions of the psyche, he opposes
thinking and feeling on one continuum and sensing and intuition on
the other. The Thinking/feeling continuum are both rational functions
in Jung's way of thinking. Here is how he does it:
"Feeling is a kind of judgement differeing from intellectual
judgement in that its aim is not to establish conceptual relaitonshs
but to set up a subjective criterion of acceptance or rejection.
Valuation by feeling extends to every content of consciousness, of
whatever kind it may be. ... Feeling like thinking is a rational
fuction,since values in general are assigned according to the laws of
reason, just as concepts in geral are formed according to these
lawas. "
So, for Jung, feeling is a kind of precise judgement, like the
faculty exercised by Judges in a Court of Law. Or maybe the sort of
think we expect from the Universal House of Justice.
Now, empathy and compassion are very interesting terms. both contain
the root "
Compassion is like sympathy. It means feeling anothers suffering. Com
+ passion is close to sym + pathy.
em + Pathy. is like being able to enter another's suffering. The key
here is the "em" as in Embody, embed, embroil. To enter. as in to
mentally identify with.
Pschologists go round and round on empathy versus sympathy. Many
define sympathy as "feel sorry for," as if it were equivalent to
"pity."
I think sympathy means to actually feel, (as in experience the
feelings) (as in, to vibrate along with, like sympathetic
vibrations.) ANd I think empathy means to understand the feeling
side, but not necessary be moved by it, as a good therapist may grasp
the feelings of grief and truely understand them in another, but not
necessarily be moved into that grief and not necessarily be drawn
into re-experiencing his/her own grief. Whereas, the sympathetic
reaction would be to re-experience that grief.
so, to respond to your point 4, I'm not sure which would involved
what you call "complete Identification with," but my definition would
say that empathy involves a certain detachment and consciousness that
sympathy does not.
but our models and definitions here don't nest very neatly with each
other.
Interesting posting.
thanks,
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 11/24/95
Time: 23:35:34
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
From belove@sover.netSat Nov 25 11:02:31 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 17:00:20 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: talisman@indiana.edu, Sadra <nima@unm.edu>
Subject: Re: Bahai Metaphisics
Nice work, Sadra.
Some questions:
1)What is the relationship between the One, in this system, and the
"Tao"?
2) So then, is Logos, a kind of underlying tautological schema, the
concatenations of which appear as attributes?
3) "Psuche" -- is this the same as what I know of as "Psyche?" This
world soul, as I understood it is sort of like the general
interiority of all living things, the trans-individual subjectivity.
The realm where the archetypes manifest -- contrasted to Logo : the
realm where the archetypes are in pure form.
Do I have it?
When you first start describing pysuche you touch upon the dubbing of
the world soul as less than good, evil. and then you pick up up
explicitely several paragraphs later. You could flag it at the first
point, when you discuss it as a "disturbance of tranquility."
I thought this was particularly wonderful:
"...cosmic sympathy. Paraphrasing Timaeus 30 d3-31 a1, in Enn. IV.4,
[32],
Plotinus states that the universe is "one giant living organism
embracing
all living beings within it,"
This is, of course, Gaia. And Gregory Bateson, who considers himself
a new-Platonist, also spoke this way -- but not of the universe,
rather only of the biosphere, of which we are,as he said "apart and a
part."
This, and the ideas you articulate in subsequent paragraphs, fit very
neatly with is also the scheme of Dharma and Karma as articulated
and described by Joseph Campbell in "The Inner Reaches of Outer
Space."
thanks
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 11/24/95
Time: 17:00:20
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
From belove@sover.netSat Nov 25 11:02:39 1995
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 95 17:29:48 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Peace by 2000? What is that!
Dear Bev,
There must be something odd about me that I find postings like yours
so re-assuring.
Thanks.
Love,
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 11/24/95
Time: 17:29:48
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
From petersm@maia.cl.au.ac.thSat Nov 25 11:02:50 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 12:57:44 +0700 (TST)
From: "Dr. Peter Smith" <petersm@maia.cl.au.ac.th>
To: Talisman <talisman@indiana.edu>
Cc: Book@maia.cl.au.ac.th
Subject: book advert
Dear Talismanians, I understand that copies of my latest inadequate
attempt to understand Babi-Bahai history are now available from ONE WORLD
in Oxford. The book is called, A Short History of the Baha'i Faith.
Good wishes, Peter Smith
From dpeden@imul.comSat Nov 25 11:02:56 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 95 09:47:37+030
From: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Turkeys
Dear Quanta:
Yeah, there are lots of time that I don't feel like painting...it's part of
a cycle of renewal. Over the years I have learned to appreciate and relax
during the lean times, and accept them as part of the whole process. In the
meantime I putz and contemplate my belly-button. And I draw and keep
journals (although talisman seems to be taking my journal energy, which is
okay).
The thanksgiving celebration sounds delightful! Turkey! Wow. We have at
times considered poaching an Ostrich for a thanksgiving dinner (but only in
October, being Canadians), but have never found an oven big enough to hold
one. Besides, I suspect they'd be tough as nails!
Love,
Bev.
From dpeden@imul.comSat Nov 25 11:04:20 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 95 09:47:22+030
From: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Buddhism
Dear Bruce:
> "I wasn't aware that Buddhism was engaged on drawing as many
separations as you imply. Thank you for the lesson." <
The Buddha had a great deal to say about the extant religious
ideologies,
and the church fathers that came after him certainly continued with
commenting on the different notions available to them.
> 'Yours in "that word and all it implies",' <
That's scary.
Yeah, it is scary to think about people TRYING to be of service using what
they understand of Spirituality. It means taking a risk, and often being
wrong. By the way, I NEVER sign letters that way, I was simply being
sarcastic regarding the use of the word God. That was less than honourable,
and I apologize.
Don't you think it is a little pointless to argue semantics? Whether you
use the word God, or whether you use the phrase "mystery of existence", can
you not accept that we are trying to discuss something that we all do not
fully understand? If you can't, there is no point of discussion. The
use of words or labels is necessary only to facilitate verbal communication.
Your point that "words" carry with them a history of assumptions is well
taken, and I have looked at my assumptions and corrected them where I feel
necessary. I can also recognize that the Buddhist viewpoint does not
recognize the historic idea of God. I'm not sure that Baha'is do either. I
don't, which was why I was asking you to rethink the assumption that my view
of God was a historical one...how could you know what my idea of god is?
Perhaps there was an assumption on your part that my words meant a set of
ideas, and this may or may not have been true.
I wasn't aware that the Buddha had commented on all extant religious
ideologies. But since his comments are now captured into a set of carried
on teachings, does that mean that there is a Buddhist theology and a
Buddhist "Church"? Doesn't that make Buddhism one of those extant religious
ideologies? And how could Buddha comment on Baha'u'llah? I'm not trying to
be argumentative, I am asking.
Could the Buddha have been commenting on our reactions to those teachings,
and our making an icon of the manifestation? Or do you think he was being
more direct? Baha'u'llah also discouraged making a diety out of a
manifestation. He wanted the ideas and spiritual practice to carry forward,
not his face.
Bruce, I really don't see any point in pursuing this line. You obviously
have an understanding of Buddhism which I don't. I have a different
understanding of spiritual reality, which I readily agree is far from
accurate or complete. I'm trying to expand that understanding. I am aware
of the implications of the Buddhist point of view on God, and can accept the
desireability of removing all barriers to enlightenment, including labels.
One one hand, I can see it, even though you don't believe so, but it is not
my choice to approach spirituality in that way. I look at it, appreciate
it, and try and bring that into my awareness when I am reading ANY of the
Holy books or philosophies. At the end of the day, I prefer the guidance in
the Writings of Baha'u'llah. It is my choice. I also don't mind people
chosing the Buddhist way...it is quite beautiful and rewarding. I don't feel
any mission to run out and insist that Buddhists view spirituality through
my chosen path.
As far as how the Baha'i faith views Buddhism, well, I don't know. I'm sure
there others on this list who can answer that better than me, perhaps even
yourself. I have seen a quotation from a letter written on behalf of the
Guardian to the National Spiritual Assembly of Australia and New Zealand,
Dec. 26, 1941 which says:
"The Buddha was a Manifestation of God, like Christ, but His followers do
not possess His authentic Writings."
Now there is a can of worms!
But it does seem sensless to argue about it. You are claiming to judge my
views from your perspective, and yet insist that I can not comment on yours
through my perspective. The only point I have been trying to make
throughout these discussions is the "end" (beginning?) which is that we are
all moving in similar directions by different paths. If my path has trees,
and your path has rivers, how do you propose we discuss "trees" and
"rivers"? Shall we move onto neutral ground and call them rocks? I had
assumed that Buddhists were even closer to this point of view than Baha'is,
as I do not see Buddhists trying to convert people to Buddhism, and I do see
Baha'is "with a mission". I had assumed that we had some dialogue in common
with Buddhists which could allow an exchange of ideas, and that I,
personally, as a Baha'i, would benefit from such a dialogue and questions.
Bernard Leach and Hamada certainly thought there was room for exchange, and
didn't get hung up on the semantics of their dialogue. And they did use
their art and craftsmanship to explore beauty, truth and spiritual essence.
But I don't get the feeling you agree. My thought was wrong. If it only
results in argument, silent meditation is better.
And yes, I believe Hitler and his crones were also part of God's creation,
like it or not. So is HIV and mosquitos. What role they serve is a whole
different discussion which I am not qualified to get into. But it does
strike me that when you look at "creation" and "nature", HIV acts true to
its nature. So do mosquitos. We humans seem to be one part of the creation
who have choices about what aspects of our nature we will develop.
There are very many more people of power in the world today who are
destructive for far less reason than Hitler was. The man was insane. These
people are just greedy.
Love,
Bev.
From dpeden@imul.comSat Nov 25 11:04:27 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 95 09:51:38+030
From: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Peace 2000
Dear Chesmak:
You have been "pondering" a long time. Any ideas or suggestions? I would
like to hear.
Love,
Bev.
From dpeden@imul.comSat Nov 25 11:04:46 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 95 10:21:33+030
From: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Buddhism
Dear Dan:
Thank you for your input. Yes, I can see the concept. Is this in conflict
with the Baha'i Writings? Is there a difference? Does Baha'u'llah say
anything which is in conflict with this description of the soul? The idea
of the elements or aggregate of the soul being in constant flux and process
is understood. I once got thrown out of a science class on evolution for
insisting that nothing was constant, but always in a state of either
materialising or decaying. And as an artist, I am constantly aware of the
whole being made of elements...I never assumed the nature of the soul to be
different. How else could I accept the dichotomy of human nature?
Baha'u'llah referes to only the good remaining when we leave this plane of
existence, doesn't he? Would that be similar to the Buddhist concept of
good being the remaining factor which can educate future generations?
I will spend more time studying your posting. There is a lot in it to think
about. Thank you.
Love,
Bev.
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzSat Nov 25 11:05:05 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 21:32:42 +1200
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: a little judgment please
Dear Linda,
Thank you for your gentlest of rebukes. I did not wish to
convey the impression that I thought that John has "bricks for brains",
however. I simply wished to express a viewpoint. John did not say that
the matter was not up for discussion. If my judgement was "unkind and very
rash", then I apologise.
Your friend,
Robert.
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzSat Nov 25 11:05:50 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 21:50:17 +1200
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: belove@sover.net, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Socrates hitched his wagon to a Star
Dear Philip,
>Sorry Robert, I don't see it. Sounds like you are saying that
>Socrates was wrong because he was put to death? Jesus, that sounds
>like a cynic's point.
No. What I am saying is that Socrates' "rightness" (or "righteousness")
brought his death. This was the price he paid for his virtue. The
sophists on the other hand were like those who ask for the truth but don't
wait for an answer, and don't occupy high positions in the Baha'i pantheon.
>
>I do think it is possible to be wrong about certain things. But I
>also think that rightness and wrongness is determined in reference to
>context.
We have discussed the case for relativism before on Talisman. Clearly, the
matter has not been resolved. But I think that we can agree there is very
little that is "relative" about the fact the geese in the North Hempisphere
fly south in the winter, or that Baha'u'llah died in the Holy Land. It is
simply wrong to assert otherwise, and in relation to this factual
correctness, contextual considerations are a secondary.
(If I am not mistaken Popper would have claimed that the assertion that
geese in the North Hempisphere fly south in the winter was not a scientific
fact because it could not be proven true in every case. ;-} Correct me if
I am wrong).
Robert.
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzSat Nov 25 11:05:56 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 21:57:12 +1200
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: Bruce Burrill <brburl@mailbag.com>, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Buddhist theology
Dear Bruce,
. Are you implying by your
>"currently" that the Buddha is still around somewhere?
Yes.
Robert.
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzSat Nov 25 11:06:09 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 22:03:22 +1200
From: Robert Johnston <robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
To: Bruce Burrill <brburl@mailbag.com>, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: the door swings both ways
Bruce,
Re. your asking whether....
nirvana or entering the 7th Valley are the same. It
>seems rather unlikely that they are.
If we are going to celebrate our differences, then let's do it together.
Yes? But let's not feel so trapped that we forget that the door swings
both ways... ;-}
Robert.
From rstockman@usbnc.orgSat Nov 25 11:07:04 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 95 07:00:23
From: "Stockman, Robert" <rstockman@usbnc.org>
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re[2]: spilling the beans
Actually, Juan, I disagree with you. I see nothing wrong with a
Baha'i institution, *in the spirit of consultation,* going to an
editor and asking him about the way the Faith is to be portrayed in a
book he is assembling. This is especially true of introductory books
which invariably give positive descriptions of religions. No one
discusses charges that Muhammad was an epileptic, or that Islam is
anti-modernist, in introductory works. Why shouldn't the Faith
receive positive treatment in an introductory book?
As I said, the key is the spirit of consultation, though. I have no
way of knowing how the NSA of Britain approached Hinnells. For that
matter, I doubt you have much knowledge of how they did it either. I
wonder whether "complaint" and "intimidation" accurately characterize
the British NSA's approach. I think not. Scandalous? Hardly.
Hamhanded? Maybe, depending on their approach.
If I were to write a book about evolution and a bunch of Christians
came and asked me to add something about the biblical perspective I'd
offer them tea, be polite, and not change a word, even if they were
consultative. But why shouldn't they come and ask?
-- Rob Stockman
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: spilling the beans
Author: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu> at INTERNET
Date: 11/22/95 11:51 AM
Darach:
On Wed, 22 Nov 1995, Darach wrote:
> Dear Juan,
> The NSA of the UK had not only a right but a duty to attempt to
> intervene on behalf of the Baha'i Community in Britain, since MacEoin
> is recognised for his anti-Baha'i polemic. He sets himself up as
> *the* authority on the Faith (which according to recent citation
> statistics he certainly is not), and the National Assembly had a
responsibility
> to attempt to rectify the bias against the Faith that was obviously going to
be
> introduced in this quite widely distributed book. I do not see
> anything wrong in their attempted intervention. Naturally they may
> have gone about it in the wrong way, but the intervention itself was
> completely justified.
> D.
> Darach Watson,
> Dept. of Exp. Physics,
> UCD,
> Ireland.
>
This is Juan: I find it completely baffling that someone who advertises
himself as being in a department of experimental physics should defend
the practice of religious bodies attempting to intervene in academic free
inquiry through complaint and intimidation. How would you feel if you
had written a chapter on the Big Bang and a group of Christian
fundamentalists came to your editor and publisher and argued it should
not be published because it was contrary to the book of Genesis?
In the world of intellectuals and academics, there is only one legitimate
response to the academic writing of Denis MacEoin about the Baha'i Faith,
and that is to write other articles in which his sources, allegations and
conclusions are critically examined. (I am, incidentally, the only
Baha'i historian actually to have engaged in some of this critique of
MacEoin in print, so I am practicing what I am preaching).
The attempt to intervene in the publication of an academic book was
ham-handed, stupid, and scandalous, and unless Baha'is begin to
understand that they have not been given some sort of divine sanction to
act like boors, they will simply go on alienating thinking persons the
world over. Then they complain about the "apathy" toward the Faith in
the West!!
Burl's point should not be lost sight of. This sort of thing goes down
very badly with thinking people, and with the increasing publication of
such stories by people involved in them such as MacEoin, the incidents
and policies are becoming widely known and being spread via e-mail. The
Faith is being hurt.
So, Darach, I plead with you and with other like-minded Baha'is to
rethink your position here, which transparently is one that damages the
good name and best interests of the Baha'i Faith.
cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
From rstockman@usbnc.orgSat Nov 25 11:07:17 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 95 07:00:22
From: "Stockman, Robert" <rstockman@usbnc.org>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: RE . Male Agression: Getting the Truth of AAR
Everything Derek says is true! Linda really did make me do a
three-legged race at 4 in the morning! You should have seen all the
crazy things we did after the Baha'i Studies Colloquy. . .
No, seriously, somehow I never saw Linda at AAR. There were 8000
people there; she was lost in the crowd. Linda, I hope your talk went
well? I stopped by to say hello but you were already sitting up front
with the other speakers and I had to run back to the Institute for
Baha'i Studies display.
But I can't vouch for anything Derek says Linda did with Chris Buck...
-- Rob Stockman
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: RE . Male Agression: Getting the Truth of AAR
Author: derekmc@ix.netcom.com (DEREK COCKSHUT ) at INTERNET
Date: 11/23/95 12:46 PM
So we were able to get Linda to admit her naughty actions at AAR. As a
Gentleman I would never refer to the actual colur of lace a Lady wore .
But there you have it folks the Story of Linda at AAR is true , she was
disqualified in the Cassock twirling contest for showing lace and
causing heart problems in the Judges . Threw an egg at Christopher Buck
, made Rob Stockman do a three-legged race at 4.00 o'clock in the
morning with the Bishop of Los Cruces yelling Go Go Robbie me boyo ,
won the Tobacco spitting contest with a 112.5 foot record effort and
kicked on the shins the 'alternative lifestyle ' Southern Baptist
Minister she decked last year in Florida because he refused to share
his orange juice . I think it is a credit to Rob Stockman that he has
shown such admirable fortitude in not mentioning all of the above .
A very Happy Thanksgiving to everybody .
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 15:19:48 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 11:27:49 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: "Stockman, Robert" <rstockman@usbnc.org>
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Re[2]: spilling the beans
Rob, I know you feel a need to defend the status quo, but I really must
question whether you *really* believe what you wrote. And it is very
easy to settle. Would you have gone to Penguin and Hinnel yourself, even
in consultation with an NSA, and attempted to blackball MacEoin out of
this writing assignment? I think not, because you know how the system
works and you have a Harvard theology degree and you know what sort of
damage it would do to the Faith. In fact, the whole affair occurred
precisely because the UK community has not either had the resources or
the acumen to hire someone like yourself to deal with these things.
As for poor Muhammad and Islam's "antimodernism", I am astonished you
could say such a thing. You clearly have not read much Daniel Pipes or a
host of other commentators on contemporary Islam who say such things and
worse. Maxime Rodinson's popular biography of the Prophet still contains
the epilepsy allegation. And the most effective Muslim responses to
these sorts of issues have been from solid academics such as Fazlur
Rahman, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, and so forth. But even some Muslims, such
as Aziz al-Azmeh (Islams and Modernities) recognize that there is a
strong antimodernist faction within contemporary Islam. I am unaware of
any instance in which office visits by Muslim bureaucrats, or
letter-writing campaigns, etc., have had any effect whatsoever on
authors, editors or publishers with regard to Islam. My Muslim friends
used to tell me how absolutely frustrated they were when they could not
get any sympathy from book stores or their patrons in their campaign to
have *Satannic Verses* boycotted (in fact, of course, a consortium of
publishers anonymously put out a paperback, in order to avoid retaliation).
I am not suggesting that your posting was insincere, only that in your
laudable desire to have all points of view get a hearing you may have
ended up implying some things to which you yourself are most likely not
personally committed.
cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan
On Sat, 25 Nov 1995, Stockman, Robert wrote:
>
> Actually, Juan, I disagree with you. I see nothing wrong with a
> Baha'i institution, *in the spirit of consultation,* going to an
> editor and asking him about the way the Faith is to be portrayed in a
> book he is assembling. This is especially true of introductory books
> which invariably give positive descriptions of religions. No one
> discusses charges that Muhammad was an epileptic, or that Islam is
> anti-modernist, in introductory works. Why shouldn't the Faith
> receive positive treatment in an introductory book?
>
> As I said, the key is the spirit of consultation, though. I have no
> way of knowing how the NSA of Britain approached Hinnells. For that
> matter, I doubt you have much knowledge of how they did it either. I
> wonder whether "complaint" and "intimidation" accurately characterize
> the British NSA's approach. I think not. Scandalous? Hardly.
> Hamhanded? Maybe, depending on their approach.
>
> If I were to write a book about evolution and a bunch of Christians
> came and asked me to add something about the biblical perspective I'd
> offer them tea, be polite, and not change a word, even if they were
> consultative. But why shouldn't they come and ask?
>
> -- Rob Stockman
>
From dawnliqu@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduSat Nov 25 15:19:55 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 11:36:18 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT <dawnliqu@fllab.chass.ncsu.edu>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: empathy=/ compassion
This is a true story of a young woman's experience with empathy
when she needed compassion. It is graphic, read at your own risk.
One late Spring night she snuggled into her bed next to the crib
of her 14 month old baby. She was alone and a bit uneasy.
After a while she fell asleep to be suddenly awakened by
a heavy weight as though dropping from the ceiling on top of her
pulling the blanket on her face, almost to a suffication.
She felt a sharp object on her throat and a faint voice saying
"if you scream, I'll kill your baby". She tried to push his face
away and her hands pulled the wooly hair which made him
more angry. "Okay!" he whispered "I hate japs and I will
kill you if make one more move like that!" "I'm not japanese"
she said, realizing that really did not matter to him anyway.
The baby got up and started crying. The rapist left his
"seeds of creation" all over her body and the blanket and
ran away. She got up and called the police and started to
take a shower to clean herself of the horrible mess.
She did not speak English very well. When the police took
her to the hospital she was as though mute. At the hospital
she was asked to sign some papers before the TREATMENT!!!
One doctor came in said a few things which she did not understand
then five or six more male doctors came in, one with camera
in hand taking forensic pictures of her body (private).
She screamed "no! no! why?". They showed her the signed paper.
Apparently, these were interns and the pictures were for the class.
The feelings she had cannot be explained here.
After the hospital TREATMENT!! The officer took her home
and they found her husband in the mean time who was away.
She did not want to spend another day at that house and until
dawn she kept reciting these prayers someone gave to her.
Prayers gave her comfort. In the morning she called the people and
told them what happened. They were really nice people.
Staunch B.F Skinner practitioners, though, somewhat stoic.
They believed that if you control the behavior, the feelings and
attitudes will change. Feelings were to be kept silent.
They were respected active members of their community.
They offered her a room with her baby until she could sort things out.
She moved in leaving her stoic husband behind. She was suspicious
of everyone who came to their weekly meetings that fit the description of the rapist.
They told her that it was best she did not think or talk about this.
Her pain was to remain silent in her. They tried to keep her busy
reading their religious books and do house work, go to meetings etc.
After couple of weeks she decided to become part of their group.
They were elated. Whenever she felt the intensity of the pain of
her suffering, she was handed bundle of pamphlets and go out
and do some street teaching. This would make the pain go away.
It was best not to "dwell on the unpleasant things of life".
Her depression was getting worse, she did not want to do anything,
except taking care of her baby. No dishes, nothing. So, this made
them upset. But, being that they were proper people, they decided
that it was best to deal with this through their Assembly.
They promised her that this would be the best experience in her life.
She was afraid and did not really want to see them. To make the
long story short, she left the meeting feeling trapped, judged,
ridiculed, betrayed, rejected, unloved and cared for etc. etc. etc.
A few weeks later she left to go pioneering via visiting two houses
of worship in different continents. Her pioneering did not work out.
She came back to a cold shouldered community.
But, she still believed that there is only one God, one Faith and one People and that's what
kept her going for as long as she did. She knows the meaning of
receiving empathy, but she can only give compassion to those in
same situations by listening to them, crying with them and
hugging them loving them as best as she can until they are filled,
without any hidden motivation and expectations from them.
lovingly,
quanta...(*_*)
From PayamA@aol.comSat Nov 25 15:20:08 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 12:06:27 -0500
From: PayamA@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Re[2]: spilling the beans
I seem to recall that the House of Justice was also upset at the way the NSA
handled this matter. Didn't they offer to make peace with Hinnels? Does
anyone remember?
Payam
From PayamA@aol.comSat Nov 25 15:21:57 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 12:06:27 -0500
From: PayamA@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Re[2]: spilling the beans
I seem to recall that the House of Justice was also upset at the way the NSA
handled this matter. Didn't they offer to make peace with Hinnels? Does
anyone remember?
Payam
From petersm@maia.cl.au.ac.thSat Nov 25 15:30:42 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 12:28:16 +0700 (TST)
From: "Dr. Peter Smith" <petersm@maia.cl.au.ac.th>
To: Member1700@aol.com
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Spilling the beans
Dear Tony et al,
Yes, I was on an academic panel at which John Hinnels described
his editorial meeting with members of the British Nsa re Denis' chapter,
and then asked me to comment. Yes, it was embarassing -- I had just
finished delivering a paper on the Bahai view of human rights. No, I
haven't collected material on this , and no I havent published anything
on it.
All good wishes,
Peter
PS. I have just been lent a modem, and am hence on Taliman again. Alas
the pressures of one-and-a-half jobs and the pleasures of 4 or 5 hours a
day commuting on Bangkok buses makes it unlikey that you will hear much
from me.
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 15:51:17 1995
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 01:31:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: Burl Barer <burlb@bmi.net>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: spilling the beans
Burl: You brought up the damage to the good name of the Baha'i faith
that has been done by the unwise actions of some Institutions with regard
to publishing and scholarship, which have now become known to non-Baha'is
who already are not charitable to the Faith. You mentioned Kalimat Press
in particular.
However, I think it only fair to point out that the non-Baha'is who know
about these problems do not know about them from Tony or Payam or anyone
at Kalimat, but rather from Denis MacEoin, a Cambridge Ph.D. who worked
on Babism and who is now a midlist author of religious thrillers writing
as Daniel Easterman. Denis left the Faith around
1981, and has made public some of *his* problems with the Institutions,
and some of his problems involved Kalimat. Tony and Payam, despite
enormous difficulties, have kept their silence and have kept on
publishing Baha'i books of great value. Another publisher who wanted to
publish some Baha'i books told me that they faced such difficulties in
dealing with the Institutions that "the message we took from it all was:
don't publish Baha'i books."
The lesson I would learn from all this if I were the Institutions would
be: 1) try not to drive Baha'i academics out of the Faith by
being especially mean to them, since they tend to have in their
possession a good deal of dirt, which they also now have a reason to make
public; 2) get rid of Review and other mechanisms which have outlived
their usefulness, have caused endless trouble, and which are now becoming
known to those who are uncharitable toward the Faith because of 1) above;
stop refusing to release, and allow to be translated, the key primary
sources on the Faith, since what is in them would benefit the Faith and
keeping them secret does more harm than good.
Since all this has come up, I post the public document from MacEoin on
which your interlocutors are depending, from the preface to his *Sources
for Early Babi Doctrine and History (Brill, 1992). Note that this book
is very widely spread in the sense that it is in all good university
libraries in the U.S., and it is a very public document. That is why it
has come into the discourse of critics of the Faith.
"When . . . Kalimat Press--a Los Angeles-based publishing house under
Baha'i management--approached me with a request for permission to publish
the survey, I agreed to let them do so, even though I lacked the time,
energy, and motivation to undertake a radical revision of the text.
Nevertheless, I did correct numerous errors, added a great deal of
information based on fresh research, and rewrote several passages in
order to reflect more accurately my current thinking.
Publication was scheduled for 1987, then 1988, the book was
listed as forthcoming, and I believe an ISBN was even issued, when I
heard from the publishers that the Baha'i authorities in the United
States had banned its publication. This was sad enough, but it is even
more to be regretted that Kalimat Press--a house which in its time issued
several valuable works of original scholarship under conditions of severe
restriction--was some months later forced to close because of pressure
brought to bear by those same authorities and the blacklisting of several
of its titles."
Of course, reports of Kalimat's death have been greatly exaggerated. And
unlike Denis, I do not think the Baha'i Distribution Service is a priori
obligated to carry any particular title. But it is highly objectionable
that Kalimat was not allowed to publish Denis's book at all, since this is
an unwarranted interference in its editorial freedom. Moreover, the book
appeared anyway, under non-Baha'i auspices, and is considerably more
meanspirited than it would have been if the author had been trying to
sell in the Baha'i market.
What MacEoin does not report here is that he wrote a chapter for the
Penguin Handbook of Living Religions on the Baha'i Faith, and thatsome
members of the UK NSA attempted to intervene with J.R. Hinnells, the
editor and a prominent Persianist, and with Penguin, not to publish it.
Hinnells now has an extremely low opinion of the Baha'i Faith.
If Baha'i authorities want to give those who are uncharitable toward us
this sort of ammunition by acting in these authoritarian ways, then so be
it. But then we will gain the sort of reputation enjoyed by the
Watchtower and the Church of Scientology, as a very odd and despotic
cult. And Burl's life as a teacher of the faith on e-mail will be made
very difficult. But we should perhaps stop to think whether this is the
sort of reputation that would have made `Abdu'l-Baha happy, and whether
we have a future in the U.S. as a part of the mainstream if we continue
to pursue Orwellian policies with regard to information and individual
expression.
cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 15:58:37 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 1995 15:36:04 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Short History of Baha'i Faith
This is an unsolicited endorsement of Peter Smith's *Short History of the
Baha'i Faith*, published by Oneworld. As Burl would say, *buy the book*!
We often have the difficulty nowadays that there are few introductory
books we can really give to intellectuals and educated lay readers.
Esslemont has its virtues but it is obviously quite dated by now. There
are two or three alternatives, and each has its virtues. But Peter has
produced a text that is concise, readable, and sythesizes the best of
recent scholarship on the history of the Faith.
Buy the book.
cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan
From dpeden@imul.comSat Nov 25 15:59:51 1995
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 95 23:42:31+030
From: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>
To: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT <dawnliqu@fllab.chass.ncsu.edu>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Turkeys
Dear Quanta:
I once had a naturalpathic doctor recommend a vegetarian diet to me, and I
asked him what that might look like. He advised me to eat as the African's
do, and I burst out laughing. In East Africa there are few vegetarians by
choice. Usually women and children (especially girls) get the beans and
sweet potatoes, as it is considered inferior food. Men eat first, and their
sons with them when they reach an age to be considered men. The women and
children eat what is left, or beans and potatoes. Sometimes they eat dodo
and potato (dodo is amaranthus weed). Women were not allowed to eat chicken
or eggs, because these were reserved for the men, and by having a taboo on
the women eating small animals (including goat), the men could leave home
and be sure their chickens and goats would not be eaten. Malnutrition was
and is very common amongst women and children. Malnutrition is not caused
by not eating meat, but by trying to eat "modern" foods instead of the
traditional combinations such as millet and beans or sorghum and beans.
Also, if a family can afford to buy maize meal, they will buy the commercial
stuff which has had the germ removed for oil manufacturing instead of
milling their own.
Whenever there is a wedding, funeral or feast, the cow is slaughtered and
everyone eats, including the women. Traditionally, that is when they were
allowed to eat meat. Also, beer is consumed by the jerry can full. The
beer can be made from either banana or sorghum (at least where we were in
Kigezi). In Don's research, it was found that the old British Agricultural
records showed that approximately 60% of the sorghum crop (the staple grain
of the area) went into houch. I think this has probably increased, as it is
one of the few income generating activities which women have, and is very
lucrative. As gender roles are changing, more and more women find that they
are being left with the "maintenance" responsibility for school fees for
their children. Cash is needed. As women don't own land, and are only
allowed to grow good crops (cash crops belong to the man), sorghum beer is
the most reliable and best way to make money.
In these new days of women breaking old traditions, it is a "strike for
freedom" to eat meat...and lots of it! You know you have "made it" if you
can serve meat everyday. Also, women are starting to refuse to kneel before
their husbands/brother-in-law/father-in-law/mother-in-law these days. They
are also starting to spend more time in the bars on the receiving end of the
beer. In "enlightened" families to woman will also be allowed to sit at the
table with the men and visitors, but I noticed that many women were not yet
comfortable in this role, and felt they should be serving. Of course, in
families with good incomes, they have servants to serve, and the woman can
play her role as hostess.
Do I sense some hackles rising?
Love,
Bev.
>Dear Bev,
>
>The ostrich is thankful to you for not pouching him/her.
>So, it sounds like to me you had a real THANKS FOR
>NOT KILLING DAY! Ironically, I envy you.
>I try to be veggian when I can without strictness.
>I really appreciate your communication with me and all others.
>
>lovingly,
>
>
>
>
>The thanksgiving celebration sounds delightful! Turkey! Wow. We have at
>times considered poaching an Ostrich for a thanksgiving dinner (but only in
>October, being Canadians), but have never found an oven big enough to hold
>one. Besides, I suspect they'd be tough as nails!
>
>quanta...(*_*)
>
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 23:47:22 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: SFotos@eworld.com
Subject: Re: Omaha; thanks
Thanks!
cheers Juan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 23:52:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: Don Peden <dpeden@imul.com>
Subject: Re: Translation
Bev: I am an admirer of your posts, and of the sentiments you have
expressed. Below is the latest version.
Baha'u'llah
Commentary on "He who knoweth his self hath known his Lord."
He is God, the August, the Beautiful.
How wondrous is the unity of the Living, the Ever-Abiding
God--a unity which is exalted above all limitations, that transcendeth
the comprehension of all created things!1 He hath, from everlasting,
dwelt in His inaccessible habitation of holiness and glory, and will unto
everlasting continue to be enthroned upon the heights of His
independent sovereignty and grandeur. How lofty hath been His
incorruptible Essence, how completely independent of the knowledge
of all created things, and how immensely exalted will it remain above
the praise of all the inhabitants of the heavens and the earth!
From the exalted source, and out of the essence of His favor
and bounty He hath entrusted every created thing with a sign of His
knowledge, so that none of His creatures may be deprived of its share
in expressing, each according to its capacity and rank, this knowledge.
This sign is the mirror of His beauty in the world of creation. The
greater the effort exerted for the refinement of this sublime and noble
mirror, the more faithfully will it be made to reflect the glory of the
names and attributes of God, and reveal the wonders of His signs and
knowledge. Every created thing will be enabled (so great is this
reflecting power) to reveal the potentialities of its pre-ordained station,
will recognize its capacity and limitations, and will testify to the truth
that "He, verily, is God; there is none other God besides Him [and that
`Ali Muhammad (the Bab) is the Manifestation of all the Names, and is
the Dawning-Point of all the Attributes, and that all were created by
His will and all act according to His command.]
There can be no doubt whatever that, in consequence of the
efforts which every man may consciously exert and as a result of the
exertion of his own spiritual faculties, this mirror can be so cleansed
from the dross of earthly defilement and purged from satanic fancies as
to be able to draw nigh unto the meads of eternal holiness and attain
the courts of everlasting fellowship. In pursuance, however, of the
principle that for every thing a time hath been fixed, and for every fruit
a season hath been ordained, the latent energies of such a bounty can
best be released, and the vernal glory of such a gift can only be
manifested, in the Days of God. Invested though each day may be
with its pre-ordained share of God's wondrous grace, the Days
immediately associated with the Manifestation of God possess a
unique distinction and occupy a station which no mind can ever
comprehend. Such is the virtue infused into them that if the hearts of
all that dwell in the heavens and the earth were, in those days of
everlasting delight, to be brought face to face with that Day Star of
unfading glory and attuned to His Will, each would find itself exalted
above all earthly things, radiant with His light, and sanctified through
His grace. All hail to this grace which no blessing, however great, can
excel, and all honor to such a loving-kindness the like of which the eye
of creation hath not seen! Exalted is He above that which they
attribute unto Him or recount about Him!
It is for this reason that, in those days, no man shall ever stand
in need of his neighbor.2 It hath already been abundantly
demonstrated that in that divinely-appointed Day the majority of them
that have sought and attained His holy court have revealed such
knowledge and wisdom, a drop of which none else besides these holy
and sanctified souls, however long he may have taught or studied, hath
grasped or will ever comprehend. It is by virtue of this power that the
beloved of God have, in the days of the Manifestation of the Day Star
of Truth, been exalted above, and made independent of, all human
learning. Nay, from their hearts and the springs of their innate powers
hath gushed out unceasingly the inmost essence of human learning and
wisdom.
[O Hadi! God willing, thou hast been guided to the lights of
the dawn of eternity and the manifestation of the everlasting morn.
For in such wise doth the heart become sanctified from the ephemeral,
wicked selves, and thus wilt thou witness that all branches of
knowledge and their secrets are inscribed upon it. For He possesseth
the comprehensive Book and the complete Word, and the mirrors that
reflect the verse, "Everything we have numbered in a clear register,"3
did you but know.
Thou hast inquired about detachment. It is well known to thee
that by detachment is intended the detachment of the soul from all else
but God. That is, it consisteth in soaring up to an eternal station,
wherein nothing that can be seen between heaven and earth deterreth
the seeker from the Absolute Truth. In other words, he is not veiled
from divine love or from busying himself with the mention of God by
the love of any other thing or by his immersion therein. For it can
clearly be seen that today most of the people have seized upon fleeting
baubles and clung to defective goods, and have remained deprived of
perpetual bounty and of the fruits of the blessed Tree.
Although a wayfarer upon the path of the Absolute Truth
might reach a particular station, without detachment he would not be
able to perceive that station or any other plane. This topic, however,
shall never be mentioned by any translator, nor shall any pen set it
down or any author discourse upon it. This is from the grace of God;
He bestoweth it upon whoso He willeth. By detachment is not meant
giving away and depleting all one's wealth. Rather, it denotes turning
unto God and supplicating Him. This plane can be attained in every
precinct and is manifest and visible from every thing. He is
detachment, and is the alpha and the omega thereof. Therefore, we
beseech God to make us detached from anyone save Him and to grace
us with the attainment of His presence. Verily, there is no God but
He. Command and creation belong to Him. He maketh beloved
whatever he wisheth to whomever He desireth, and verily He is
Powerful over all things.
Another question regarded the Return. This matter hath been
treated in detail and at length in all the Tablets, in diverse statements
and innumerable aphorisms. God willing, thou shalt refer to them, that
thou mightest attain an understanding thereof. The genesis of all
things is from God and all things shall return unto Him. There is no
escape for anyone. All return to the Absolute Truth, but some to His
mercy and good pleasure, and others to His wrath and fire. In Persian
and Arabic Tablets this matter hath been commented upon in its
entirety. Refer to them if ye desire to know. Likewise, the Primal
Point, may his grandeur be glorified, wrote in detail concerning this
subject in the Persian Bayan. Consult it, for a single letter thereof
sufficeth all the people of the earth. Verily, God hath made mention of
all things in a perspicuous Book. Consider thine own origin, which
was from God, and which shall return unto Him. As ye began, so shall
ye return, and shall return to Him.
Thou has asked about the saying, "Whoso knoweth his own
self hath known his Lord." It is well known to thee that this statement
hath, in every one of the infinite worlds, wondrous meanings according
to the exigencies of that world, of which no one else hath or ever will
have any knowledge. Were all of this to be discussed as it deserveth,
all the pens of the universe and oceans of ink would not suffice.
However, a droplet from this most great, endless ocean shall be
mentioned, that perhaps seekers might be enabled to reach their
destination and wayfarers might attain the original goal. God guideth
whoso He desireth to the path of the Mighty, the Powerful, the
Omnipotent.]
Consider the rational faculty with which God hath endowed the
essence of man. Examine thine own self, and behold how thy motion
and stillness, thy will and purpose, thy sight and hearing, thy sense of
smell and power of speech, and whatever else is related to, or
transcendeth, thy physical senses or spiritual perceptions, all proceed
from, and owe their existence to, this same faculty.4 So closely are they
related unto it, that if in less than the twinkling of an eye its
relationship to the human body be severed, each and everyone of these
senses will cease immediately to exercise its function, and will be
deprived of the power to manifest the evidences of its activity. It is
indubitably clear and evident that each of these afore-mentioned
instruments has depended, and will ever continue to depend, for its
proper functioning on this rational faculty, which should be regarded
as a sign of the revelation of Him Who is the sovereign Lord of all.
Through its manifestation, all these names and attributes have been
revealed, and by the suspension of its action they are all destroyed and
perish.
It would be wholly untrue to maintain that this faculty is the
same as the power of vision, inasmuch as the power of vision is
derived from it and acteth in dependence upon it. It would, likewise,
be idle to contend that this faculty can be identified with the sense of
hearing, as the sense of hearing receiveth from the rational faculty the
requisite energy for performing its functions.
This same relationship bindeth this faculty with whatsoever
hath been the recipient of these names and attributes within the human
temple. These diverse names and revealed attributes have been
generated through the agency of this sign of God. Immeasurably
exalted is this sign, in its essence and reality, above all such names and
attributes. Nay, all else besides it will, when compared with its glory,
fade into utter nothingness and become a thing forgotten.
Wert thou to ponder in thy heart, from now until the end that
hath no end, and with all the concentrated intelligence and
understanding which the greatest minds have attained in the past or
will attain in the future, this divinely ordained and subtle Reality, this
sign of the revelation of the All-Abiding, All-Glorious God, thou wilt
fail to comprehend its mystery or to appraise its virtue. Having
recognized thy powerlessness to attain to an adequate understanding
of that Reality which abideth within thee, thou wilt readily admit the
futility of such efforts as may be attempted by thee, or by any of the
created things, to fathom the mystery of the Living God, the Day Star
of unfading glory, the Ancient of everlasting days. This confession of
helplessness which mature contemplation must eventually impel every
mind to make is in itself the acme of human understanding [`irfan] and
marketh the culmination of man's development.
[If thou wert to ascend the stages of reliance upon God and
detachment by means of the ladders of glory and inaccessibility, and if
thou wert to open thy spiritual eye, thou wouldst see this utterance as
an abstract truth, free of the limitations of self. And thou wouldst hear
the words, "Whoso hath known any thing hath known his Lord" in the
ear of thy consciousness through the angelic call of the divine dove of
holiness. For in all things is present and visible the sign of the
effulgence of the self-subsistent Glory and the rays of the manifestation
of the unique Sun. This sign is not and never shall be confined to any
one soul. This is the truth, and no doubt lies therein, if you be among
those who know. But the primary intent of knowing the self in this
station is the knowledge of the Self of God in every era and age. For
the pre-existent essence and the ocean of reality is exalted above the
knowledge of all else but Him. Therefore, the insight attained by all
the mystics actually hath reference to their insight into the
Manifestations of His Cause. They are the Self of God among His
servants, His Manifestation in His Creation, His Sign among His
creatures. Whoso knoweth them hath known God, whoso hath
affirmed them hath affirmed God, whoso hath acknowledged Their
truth hath acknowledged the signs of God, the Help in Peril, the
Everlasting. Thus do We reveal for you the signs, that you might be
guided by the Signs of God.
O Hadi, follow the guidance of God, thy Lord and the Lord of
all things. Then gird up thy loins to aid the Cause of God. Do not
follow those who took pharaoh's magician, Samiri, as their friend
instead of God, who ridicule the verses of God and are of the
transgressors. And when the verses of thy Lord are recited to them,
they say, "These are veils."
Say: By virtue of what word have you believed in God, your
Lord? Produce it, if you speak the truth. Now, matters have reached
such a pass that, by Him Who holds my soul in His hands, all who are
in the heavens and on earth weep and wail with the eye of mystery at
how this Servant is oppressed. We have relied upon God, Our Lord
and the Lord of all things. I shall ever view all who are in the world as
nothing but a handful of dust, save for those who have entered into the
depths of the love and knowledge of God. Thus do we remind thee,
that thou mightest be among they who know.
As for thy question concerning the Saying, "The believer is
alive in both worlds:" Yes, that is a truth, like the existence of the sun,
which shone forth in this atmosphere, which hath appeared in this sky,
which subsisteth in this Cloud of the Unseen, if thou art among those
who know. Indeed, wert thou to be steadfast in thy love for thy Lord
and to attain that station wherein thou shalt never stumble, there
would appear from thee that whereby both worlds would be revivified.
This is revelation from the Mighty, the All-Knowing. Then thank God
for having given thee to drink from this spring, which giveth new life
to the spirits of the Near Ones; for having lifted thee up in truth; and
for having revealed to thee those Words whereby the proof of God to
all the worlds was perfected. By God, if a drop thereof were
bestowed on the people of the heavens and the earth, thou wouldst
find them all subsisting in the eternity of thy Lord, the Mighty, the
Powerful.]
It is clear and evident that when the veils that conceal the
realities of the manifestations of the Names and Attributes of God, nay
of all created things visible or invisible, have been rent asunder,
nothing except the Sign of God will remain--a sign which He, Himself
hath placed within these realities.5 This sign will endure as long as is
the wish of the Lord thy God, the Lord of the heavens and of the
earth. If such be the blessings conferred on all created things, how
superior must be the destiny of the true believer, whose existence and
life are to be regarded as the originating purpose of all creation. Just
as the conception of faith hath existed from the beginning that hath no
beginning, and will endure till the end that hath no end, in like manner
will the true believer eternally live and endure. His spirit will
everlastingly circle round the Will of God. He will last as long as God,
Himself, will last. He is revealed through the Revelation of God, and
is hidden at His bidding. It is evident that the loftiest mansions in the
Realm of Immortality have been ordained as the habitation of them
that have truly believed in God and in His signs. Death can never
invade that holy seat. Thus have We entrusted thee with the signs of
Thy Lord, that thou mayest persevere in thy love for Him, and be of
them that comprehend this truth.
[Since all these matters have been mentioned extensively and in
detail in most of the Tablets, We have adverted to them here only with
the utmost brevity. We hope that, God willing, thou shalt attain the
farthest horizon of holiness, shalt arrive at the reality of those journeys
that are the station of subsistence in God, and shalt have influence,
shine and glow like a sun in the world of dominion and sovereignty.
Despair not of the clemency of God, for none despaireth of His
generosity save those in loss . . .]
1 Thus begins Shoghi Effendi's translation, Gleanings CXXIV
2 This verse has possible Uvaysi implications, abolishing the need for a
Sufi pir.
3 Qura'n 36:11, 78:29.
4 Shoghi Effendi's translation, again, Gleanings LXXXIII
5 Shoghi Effendi's translation, in Gleanings, LXXIII
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 00:24:35 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Baha'i bill of rights/ criminal code
Friends: In my work on human rights in Baha'i scriptures and within
the Baha'i Faith, I have gradually come to realize that there is no
written-down legal code governing when and whether a Baha'i's
administrative rights may be removed.
The beloved Guardian disapproved of removing administrative rights
for any but the most weighty reasons. "If such sanctions were lightly
used the friends would come to attach no importance to it, or to feel
the NSA used it every time they got angry with some individual's
disobedience to them." (Lights of Guidance, [hereafter LOG], p. 49).
I have a list of Membership statistics from National date April, 1979,
for the U.S. It shows 75, 448 Baha'is with administrative rights and
1,948 (nearly 2,000!!) without administrative rights. This is an
expulsion rate of 2.5%. But note that Baha'is with known addresses
were only 48,357, and the ones who were expelled ipso facto belonged
to the group the NSA could find. So the true percentage of the active
community expelled was more like 4 % or one in every 25 persons.
Obviously, this is quite high. It would be like having 3,200,000 U.S.
Catholics excommunicated. I do not know what the percentages are
today.
The problem is that many actions are frowned upon in the Baha'i faith
in varying degrees. Smoking is frowned upon but not sanctioned. I
know of no one who has has their administrative rights taken away for
smoking. What about backbiting? Lying? These are prohibited.
Should they be the grounds for removal of administrative rights?
It is highly undesirable that this important matter remain so vague. It
is very difficult to specify human rights if the law itself is unspecific.
I would argue that administrative rights may only be taken away for
specific acts contrary to Baha'i law in the Aqdas and its supplements.
Some NSAs in the world have started employing the removal of
administrative rights as a control mechanism, to silence Baha'is, which
is a derogation of their right, guaranteed by the beloved Guardian, to
declare their conscience and express their views.
I'd like to see a legal code specifying actionable offenses. To that
end, I have drawn up the following. Additions and comments are
welcome.
cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
Grounds for Removal of Administrative Rights of a Baha'i
I. General principles and agencies for removal of rights
"Those who conspicuously disgrace the Faith or refuse to abide by its
laws can be deprived, as a punishment, of their voting rights . . ."
Shoghi Effendi, Dawn of a New Day, p. 128.
The right to decide who has the voting privilege is also ultimately
placed in the hands of the National Spiritual Assembly...(Baha'i
Administration, page 80)
In Dawn of a New Day, page 111, Shoghi Effendi's secretary says that
local assemblies 'should certainly never' be allowed to
decide cases regarding the removal of voting rights because
'personal feelings might colour the Assembly's decision.'
[Sen McGlinn commented that "The same naturally applies to the
national assembly incases in which its members or the assembly itself
are personally involved."]
"If such sanctions were lightly used the friends would come to attach
no importance to it, or to feel the NSA used it every time they got
angry with some individual's disobedience to them." (LOG, p. 49).
II. Specific Infractions
Prolonged and flagrant use of alcohol (Lights of Guidance, p. 39).
Flagrant homosexuality disgracing to the Cause. (Lights of Guidance,
p. 40).
Blatant extra-marital relationships. (Lights of Guidance, p. 41).
Being found guilty by a civil court of criminal offenses that
conspicuously disgrace the Faith. (Lights of Guidance, p. 41).
Marriage without the consent of parents. (SE, Directives, p. 40).
Having a civil marriage only. (Lights of Guidance, p. 42).
Taking a marriage vow contrary to Baha'i principles, such as, in a
Catholic ceremony, promising to raise the children Catholic (Lights of
Guidance, p. 42).
Being party to a non-Baha'i religious marriage ceremony wherein one
conceals or denies one's Baha'i faith. (Lights of Guidance, p. 42).
Giving one's consent, as a parent, to a religious marriage ceremony in
which one's child conceals or denies his or her Baha'i faith. (Lights of
Guidance, p. 42).
In case of divorce, marriage to a third party within the year of
patience. (Lights of Guidance, p. 40)
Refusal to dissociate oneself from political activities; acceptance
political office (Lights of Guidance, p. 33).
Refusal to dissociate oneself from [non-Baha'i] ecclesiastical activities;
acceptance of ecclesiastical office. (Lights of Guidance, p. 33).
Membership in Freemasonry (Directives, p. 26)
Membership in Theosophical, Rosicrucian and similar societies.
Membership in secret societies. (Lights of Guidance, p. 43).
Refusal to accept election to an administrative post. (Lights of
Guidance, p. 32).
Repeated absence from Assembly meetings with no valid excuse.
(Shoghi Effendi, Dawn of a New Day, p. 79).
Incapacity by virtue of mental illness. (S.E., Directives, p. 42)
An attitude of contempt for Baha'i law can prolong the sentence.
(LOG, p. 50).
Recently in some Baha'i communities infractions such as "Making a
false statement about an NSA member, even in private" [or a
statement alleged by an NSA to be false] appear to have been added to
this list. Do any of you know of particular cases that would expand
the list to cover actual contemporary practice?
III. Consequences
Consequences: Cannot attend Feast or other meetings for Baha'is
only; cannot vote or hold Baha'i office; cannot contribute to the Fund;
cannot be married in a Baha'i ceremony (LOG, p. 45, 50). *May* be
buried in a Baha'i ceremony and may receive Baha'i charity (LOG, p.
46).
IV. Terms for reinstatement of administrative rights.
The Assembly should feel that the person is "truly repentant." (LOG,
p. 49).
"If the voting rights have been removed justifiably it is generally
sufficient for the believer to take the necessary actions to have them
restored; his application for restoration and compliance with the
requirements of Baha'i law are sufficient evidence of repentance.
However, if the Assembly sees that the believer does not understand
the reason for the deprivation and has a rebellious attitude it should
endeavour to make the matter clear to him. If his attitude is one of
contempt for the Baha'i law and his actions have been in serious
violation of its requirements, the Assembly may even be justified in
extending the period of deprivation beyond the time of the rectification
of the situation--but such cases, by their nature, are very rare."
(LOG, p. 50).
[Some NSA's have begun asking for "personal, public apologies" to
NSA members as a requirement for reinstatement of rights. This does
not appear to be justified by the Guardian's guidelines.]
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 10:36:33 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Zen
Bruce, I'm always happy to see your pugnacious postings, and think it is
wonderful that you take time to dialogue with us.
But I have increasingly gotten the feeling that you are not interested in
a dialogue or in exploring together so as to find new insights, so much
as you are in telling us what's what. Taking that attitude is your
privilege, of course. But it would be so much more useful to have a real
dialogue in which we are open to the specific spiritual insights of your
Buddhist tradition, and you are open to Baha'i spiritual
insights (or have you decided that the Baha'i Writings have none?) Such
a dialogue takes work. For instance, it would be nice if you had
actually read some key Baha'i works aside from Momen's book. You once
gave evidence of not even having read Some Answered Questions. Have you
read Gleanings?
I spent a number of years studying Chinese and Japanese Buddhism with Isshi
Yamada, a Zen priest who had become an academic, and I have continued to
read in those traditions. My current project is *not* to define what
Buddhism is or is not. It is to see how we might gain a different
understanding of *Baha'i* texts by looking at them in the context of Zen
ideas. I should have thought the idea of Baha'is trying to learn from
Buddhism rather than the other way around would meet some of the
concerns you have expressed in the past. In some instances the ideas will
be incompatible; in others, there may be something to be gained. But to
be quite frank, this becomes way too complicated if the discussion becomes
a three-way one, between Theravada, Zen and Baha'i. So could we please
stick with the relevant texts; if you want to quarrel with something I have
said, fine, but it should be a quarrel from a Zen point of view, not a
Theravadin or some kind of generic "Buddhist" one. And, by the way, I
think you are on *very* shaky ground in trying to critique Dumoulin, who
knows Sanskrit, Chinese and Japanese and has devoted his life to the study
of Zen.
In short, Bruce, I say "Buddha-mind, no Buddha-mind!"
cheers Juan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 17:43:54 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: Megha Shyam <meghas@sparcom.com>
Subject: Re: Juan Cole's material
Thanks so much for the input, Megha.
My understanding is that removal of *administrative* rights by the NSA
under no circumstances results in *shunning*, which only comes into play
when someone is spiritually expelled.
I am interested in adding things like child abuse to the list, but wanted
to know if anyone had heard of specific cases where rights were removed
for this reason.
I am very disturbed at the increasing use of removal of administrative
rights by the NSA on grounds of simple *speech.* I do not believe the
beloved Guardian's practice justifies such a thing. I am also disturbed
that the NSA does not recuse itself when it is an interested party. I
believe both tendencies can ultimately produce a sort of Baha'i fascism
and that we must find a way to avoid this.
cheers Juan Cole, Dept. of History, Univ. of Michigan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 17:49:08 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: Elizabeth Davis Barlow <bbarlow@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Conference, again.
Betsy:
I'll try to get to the conference a little early. Otherwise, everything
looks set.
Joseph's photographs of *people* in Bisharri are magnificent and
definitely worth displaying at U-M.
cheers JRIC
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 18:23:43 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Juan Cole's material
Dear X: Allah'u'Abha! Thanks a million for responding; this is very
useful. Some comments below - Juan
On Thu, 16 Nov 1995, MS wrote:
> **********************************************************************
> >. Friends: In my work on human rights in Baha'i scriptures and within
> > the Baha'i Faith, I have gradually come to realize that there is no
> > written-down legal code governing when and whether a Baha'i's
> > administrative rights may be removed.
>
>
> Trying to attempt a legal frame work (particularly in terms of an
> American model) is not a good idea. I believe that each case
> needs to be given the necessary time and energy by LSAs and
> NSAs by its members or appropriate staff. Removal of administrative
> sanctions should be rare and effective when invooked and just.
>
In the absence of a legal framework, with everything ad hoc, how can you
know whether you are breaking the law or not? What stops an NSA from
acting vindictively or unreasonably, removing people's rights simply
because it does not like them? Or removing rights where it is an
interested party to the dispute? I have seen it happen, so don't tell me
it is impossible; nor is it always redressed by the House. The
potentiality for tyranny here is very great, and individuals have no
protection of their rights whatsoever.
> **************************************************************
> > The beloved Guardian disapproved of removing administrative rights
> >. for any but the most weighty reasons. "If such sanctions were lightly
> > used the friends would come to attach no importance to it, or to feel
> > the NSA used it every time they got angry with some individual's
> > disobedience to them." (Lights of Guidance, [hereafter LOG], p. 49).
>
> There is very good wisdom in Guardian's reluctance to remove rights
> for the very reason stated here. One has to take the energy and time
> to unpoliticise the wrath of LSA members or NSA members. The case
> in point is a rather recent event in our own LSA when we got very upset
> at the Assistant to ABM for protection, but got couselled by Jaci Delahunt
> that it was important to learn to work together and allow each unit to do its
> job as it sees best, but express the concerns in an appropriate manner,
> i.e.,
> when cooler heads prevail.
I agree. But I know of an NSA that has now threatened the removal of an
individual's rights because he posted an e-mail message describing an
incident that occurred some years ago differently than the NSA would like
to see it described. I can think of no word for such an action on an
NSA's part other than authoritarian. We need a legal code that would
prevent this simple bullying and manufacturing of thought crimes.
> **********************************************************************
>
> > I have a list of Membership statistics from National date April, 1979,
> > for the U.S. It shows 75, 448 Baha'is with administrative rights and
> > 1,948 (nearly 2,000!!) without administrative rights. This is an
> > expulsion rate of 2.5%. But note that Baha'is with known addresses
> > were only 48,357, and the ones who were expelled ipso facto belonged
> > to the group the NSA could find. So the true percentage of the active
> > community expelled was more like 4 % or one in every 25 persons.
> > Obviously, this is quite high. It would be like having 3,200,000 U.S.
> > Catholics excommunicated. I do not know what the percentages are
> > today.
>
> Trying to analyze the data in this manner is a very poor way to look at
> the problem. Being a young Faith in an alien culture such as the
> American culture, it is not surprising at all that these numbers are
> high. Trying to compare it with the Catholics is somewhat absurd in
> my opinion bacause it compares apples and oranges.
I beg to differ here. I think the figures show that removal of
administrative rights in the late 70s was resorted to far too often. I
would be interested in knowing the statistics for the mid-'90s.
> ****************************************************************************
>
> > The problem is that many actions are frowned upon in the Baha'i faith
> > in varying degrees. Smoking is frowned upon but not sanctioned. I
> > know of no one who has has their administrative rights taken away for
> > smoking. What about backbiting? Lying? These are prohibited.
> > Should they be the grounds for removal of administrative rights?
> >
> > It is highly undesirable that this important matter remain so vague. It
> > is very difficult to specify human rights if the law itself is unspecific.
>
> What makes more sense to me is that the standards set by Baha'u'llah
> should be known in no uncertain terms; not wishy washy - as an example
> when there is an obvious violation of Baha'i law such as cohabitation, the
> directives from the House of Justice are very clear - work with the couple
> involved showing gentleness, firmness and love and concern all at the same
> time and this is not easy to do. (Having a set of rules to work by is an
> easy thing to do; you don't have to think but just look up chapter and verse
> and throw the book on people; justice involves many characteristics blending
> together - love, compassion, firmness, wisdom, image of the Faith etc.
My problems have more to do with issues of disagreement among and between
Baha'is and institutions, and issues in speech rights. At the moment, in
the absence of a legal code, the only safe thing to do is to keep one's
mouth shut and bow down in obeisance, which stultifies the Faith.
> ****************************************************************************
> ************
>
> > I would argue that administrative rights may only be taken away for
> > specific acts contrary to Baha'i law in the Aqdas and its supplements.
> > Some NSAs in the world have started employing the removal of
> > administrative rights as a control mechanism, to silence Baha'is, which
> > is a derogation of their right, guaranteed by the beloved Guardian, to
> > declare their conscience and express their views.
>
> > I'd like to see a legal code specifying actionable offenses. To that
> > end, I have drawn up the following. Additions and comments are
> > welcome.
>
> > cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
>
> Trying to having a legal code written presents some unique problems -
>
> 1. The documents can only be general principles, and not specific
> details as the latter would compromise the confidentiality of the
> relationship between the believer and the Spiritual Assembly (Local
> or National)
>
> 2. It will fail to consider needs for the nurturing of individuals in
> the family
> of Baha'u'llah. As an example, in west we were not required to pay
> Huquq'ullah for nearly 100 years, alcoholism in a predominantly native
> American community by nature has to be dealt differently; cremation
> would be big issue in oriental societies such as India, Japan, etc.
These problems are easily dealt with by establishing a *necessary* but
not *sufficient* rule. One could detail the precise offenses that would
be *necessary* as grounds for removal of rights, while employing language
that would show that, say, alcoholism was not in all instances
*sufficient* grounds. Even in civil law, prosecutors are at liberty as
to whether to press charges, and judges most often have great leeway in
sentencing. The legal code is intended not to tie Institutions' hands
but to protect individuals from arbitrary action by their institutions.
At the moment, the NSA could take a Baha'i's rights away for squinting
cross-eyed at an NSA member; there is no law to prevent them. And with 6
million Baha'is to worry about, the House is not able to review in
extenso all appeals.
>
> ****************************************************************************
> **************
> > Grounds for Removal of Administrative Rights of a Baha'i
>
> > I. General principles and agencies for removal of rights
>
> > "Those who conspicuously disgrace the Faith or refuse to abide by its
> > laws can be deprived, as a punishment, of their voting rights . . ."
> > Shoghi Effendi, Dawn of a New Day, p. 128.
>
> The operating words here are "can be deprived, as a punsihment";
O.K.
>
> > The right to decide who has the voting privilege is also ultimately
> > placed in the hands of the National Spiritual Assembly...(Baha'i
> > Administration, page 80)
>
> > In Dawn of a New Day, page 111, Shoghi Effendi's secretary says that
> > local assemblies 'should certainly never' be allowed to
> > decide cases regarding the removal of voting rights because
> > 'personal feelings might colour the Assembly's decision.'
> > [Sen McGlinn commented that "The same naturally applies to the
> > national assembly incases in which its members or the assembly itself
> > are personally involved."]
>
> > "If such sanctions were lightly used the friends would come to attach
> > no importance to it, or to feel the NSA used it every time they got
> > angry with some individual's disobedience to them." (LOG, p. 49).
>
> These are areas where the National Assemblies need to gently educate the
> friends as to take their responsibilties. In the last 5 months we faced
> three
> such cases and each case was resolved positively by the compassion
> shown by the LSA; people involved ranged in ages from 17 to 55 and the
> one who was least cooperative was the 55 year old one. This is where
> there is a lot of room for NSAs to establish reliable and solid trainers to
> develop people skills to handle various aspects of people's problems.
I'm afraid I don't think all NSA's are necessarily as compassionate and
mature as your own LSA.
>
> ***************************************************************************
> > II. Specific Infractions
>
> > Prolonged and flagrant use of alcohol (Lights of Guidance, p. 39).
>
> > Flagrant homosexuality disgracing to the Cause. (Lights of Guidance,
> > p. 40).
>
> > Blatant extra-marital relationships. (Lights of Guidance, p. 41).
>
> > Being found guilty by a civil court of criminal offenses that
> > conspicuously disgrace the Faith. (Lights of Guidance, p. 41).
>
> > Marriage without the consent of parents. (SE, Directives, p. 40).
>
> > Having a civil marriage only. (Lights of Guidance, p. 42).
>
> > Taking a marriage vow contrary to Baha'i principles, such as, in a
> > Catholic ceremony, promising to raise the children Catholic (Lights of
> > Guidance, p. 42).
>
> > Being party to a non-Baha'i religious marriage ceremony wherein one
> > conceals or denies one's Baha'i faith. (Lights of Guidance, p. 42).
>
> > Giving one's consent, as a parent, to a religious marriage ceremony in
> > which one's child conceals or denies his or her Baha'i faith. (Lights of
> > Guidance, p. 42).
>
> > In case of divorce, marriage to a third party within the year of
> > patience. (Lights of Guidance, p. 40)
>
> > Refusal to dissociate oneself from political activities; acceptance
> > political office (Lights of Guidance, p. 33).
>
> > Refusal to dissociate oneself from [non-Baha'i] ecclesiastical activities;
> > acceptance of ecclesiastical office. (Lights of Guidance, p. 33).
>
> > Membership in Freemasonry (Directives, p. 26)
>
> > Membership in Theosophical, Rosicrucian and similar societies.
> > Membership in secret societies. (Lights of Guidance, p. 43).
>
> > Refusal to accept election to an administrative post. (Lights of
> > Guidance, p. 32).
>
> > Repeated absence from Assembly meetings with no valid excuse.
> > (Shoghi Effendi, Dawn of a New Day, p. 79).
>
> > Incapacity by virtue of mental illness. (S.E., Directives, p. 42)
>
> > An attitude of contempt for Baha'i law can prolong the sentence.
> > (LOG, p. 50).
>
> This certainly is a good start of a list of infractions. The key for the
> Spiritual Assembly to find out is whether there was a flagrant disregard
> to Baha'i standards or a naive belief that there are good things in many
> organizations (the recent experience of many Baha'is around the country
> belonging to Beyond War movement comes to mind - Baha'is eneterd it
> to convert everybody!!). What is needed is get the point across that
> Spiritual Assemblies have a dual purpose promologate new procedures
> in a community and adminsiter justice. These bring different
> responsibilities
> and need to enkindle these responsibilities to the friends.
What in the world is the "Beyond War" movement? Can Baha'is be
sanctioned for belonging to it? I thought only if it was a political
party or a secret society could membership be banned? This sort of
vagueness is why a specific legal code is desirable.
> ****************************************************************************
> **************
> > Recently in some Baha'i communities infractions such as "Making a
> > false statement about an NSA member, even in private" [or a
> > statement alleged by an NSA to be false] appear to have been added to
> > this list. Do any of you know of particular cases that would expand
> > the list to cover actual contemporary practice?
>
> I could add here
> child abandonment, or refusing to educate one's children, child abuse,
> domestic violence, unwillingness to resolve difficulties, open challenge
> of Adminsitrative instituitions.
The part about "making a false statement" is a complaint. I can find no
evidence that the beloved Guardian thought speech was actionable.
Do you know of specific cases where child abandonment, child abuse,
domestic violence, or refusing to educate one's children have resulted in
the loss of administrative rights even where there has been no civil
conviction? It makes sense, but I am trying to document current practice.
Removing administrative rights for attitudes like "unwillingness to
resolve difficulties" or "challenge" of administrative institutions
strikes me as a very dangerous practice threatening to Baha'is'
inalienable rights, and with frankly authoritarian implications for the
kind of society we are building.
> ******************************************************************************
> > III. Consequences
>
> > Consequences: Cannot attend Feast or other meetings for Baha'is
> > only; cannot vote or hold Baha'i office; cannot contribute to the Fund;
> > cannot be married in a Baha'i ceremony (LOG, p. 45, 50). *May* be
> > buried in a Baha'i ceremony and may receive Baha'i charity (LOG, p.
> > 46).
>
> In addition the individuals may be shunned by Baha'is.
My understanding is that shunning is not practiced toward persons who
merely have had administrative rights removed, but only toward those who
have been spiritually expelled by the House.
>
> ****************************************************************************
> ********
> > IV. Terms for reinstatement of administrative rights.
>
> > The Assembly should feel that the person is "truly repentant." (LOG,
> > p. 49).
>
> > "If the voting rights have been removed justifiably it is generally
> > sufficient for the believer to take the necessary actions to have them
> > restored; his application for restoration and compliance with the
> > requirements of Baha'i law are sufficient evidence of repentance.
> > However, if the Assembly sees that the believer does not understand
> > the reason for the deprivation and has a rebellious attitude it should
> > endeavour to make the matter clear to him. If his attitude is one of
> > contempt for the Baha'i law and his actions have been in serious
> > violation of its requirements, the Assembly may even be justified in
> > extending the period of deprivation beyond the time of the rectification
> > of the situation--but such cases, by their nature, are very rare."
> > (LOG, p. 50).
>
> > [Some NSA's have begun asking for "personal, public apologies" to
> > NSA members as a requirement for reinstatement of rights. This does
> > not appear to be justified by the Guardian's guidelines.]
>
> I do not have the quote here, but in the Assembly Development Program
> developed during the 70's by Dan Jordan and Staff, there were several
> sections concerning judicial fucntions; I will quote these at a later time.
I'd be *very* interested.
Thanks again! cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 00:18:17 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: "Eric D. Pierce" <PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Judy's paper on Babism
This paper is an unremarkable scissors-and-paste narrative dependent on a
few secondary sources. Very large numbers of important works are absent
here, possibly because it must have been written in 1989, when Amanat's
book was first published, and so it does not take account of subsequent
volumes of, e.g., Studies in Babi and Baha'i Religions (Kalimat).
1) Todd Lawson's careful philological work in the Bab's early esoteric
writings have demonstrated that to insiders his claim to be the 12th Imam
would have been entirely apparent right from the beginning. This
contradicts the MacEoin account, but Todd has done the very difficult
textual work on Arabic esoteric texts that MacEoin never carried out
(Denis once confessed to me that he was not particularly good at
analyzing highly abstract texts). Todd's work is a Ph.D. dissertation in
Islamics at McGill and some of it has been published in Studies in Babi
and Baha'i Religions vol. 5 and in book chapters and journal articles.
2) Since Azal sent Mirza Aqa Jan to Iran in 1854-56 with instructions to
try and assassinate Nasiru'd-Din Shah; since Azal openly called for the
assassination of Dayyan in his *al-Mustayqiz*; since Azal married the
Bab's temporary-wife widow in the same period, in contradiction of the
Bayan; the depiction of him as a shy retiring naif out-maneuvered by an
ambitious and "ruthless" Baha'u'llah is complete nonsense. It was
Baha'u'llah who had retired to Sulaymaniyyah in this period to avoid
causing any contention!
3) I should have thought that the break with Islam was commemorated by
two events, the revelation of the Persian Bayan, which abrogated the
Qur'an; and Badasht, which announced the abrogation. Why the problematic
of this slight scissors-and-past job should be whether the Babi movement
broke from Islam rather puzzles me.
cheers Juan Cole, Professor of Middle Eastern History, University of
Michigan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 01:14:44 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Zen & Baha'i
"From the exalted source, and out of the essence of His favor and
bounty He hath entrusted every created thing with a sign of His
knowledge, so that none of His creatures may be deprived of its share
in expressing, each according to its capacity and rank, this
knowledge." - Baha'u'llah
Literally, this says that from the exaltation of pure magnanimity and
the sublimity of unalderated generosity, He reposited a sign--of
mystical insight into Himself (ayih-'i `irfan-i khud)--in all visible things,
so that no thing should be deprived, each according to its plane, of
mystical insight into God.
`Irfan in Sufi and Shi`ite mysticism is mystical insight. Baha'u'llah here
says that every existent in the cosmos is endowed with the sign of
mystical insight into the Absolute Truth. I find this diction very
interesting and challenging. Insight is a type of knowledge; this
knowledge *is present* in all things. And it is present not as a thing or
essence or capacity but as a *sign*. A sign is that which points to
something else. The Greek is semeia. The study of signs as systems
of communication is called semiotics. Baha'u'llah is saying that the
cosmos and everything in it is theo-semiotic. It sign-ifies mystical
insight into the Absolute Truth.
It seems to me that, as Stephen Friberg rightly says, this idea is
analogous to Dogen's Zen notion that all things, not just sentient
beings, but all things are Buddha-mind.
"In Dogen's understanding, the Buddha-nature is not a potentiality,
like a seed, that exists within all sentient beings. Instead, all sentient
beings, or more exactly, all beings, living and nonliving, *are*
originally Buddha-nature. It is not a potentiality to be actualized
sometime in the future, but the original, fundamental nature of all
beings." - Masao Abe, *A Study of Dogen*, p. 42
But if whole-being is Buddha-mind, if each of us is a semiotic device
pointing toward the Absolute Truth, then is not everything perfect?
A dialogue between a Zen master (Roshi) and a student may help
clarify here:
Student: "Last night I said to myself, "Fortunately I don't have to
strive for enlightenment, because I am already enlightened."
Roshi: "While it is true that innately you are a Buddha, until you have
concretely perceived your Buddha-nature you are speaking in
borrowed phrases when you speak of enlightenment. The purpose of
your practice is to lead you to this experience." - Kapleau, Three
Pillars of Zen, p. 130.
Human beings must struggle against a sort of false consciousness,
generated by their self and passion, that prevents them from *seeing*
that they are Buddha-mind; or that, in Baha'i terms, they are theo-
semiotic.
(This last is a Rinzai Zen sentiment, linking striving to satori or
enlightenment; it contrasts with Dogen's Soto teaching that practice
and enlightenment are unrelated, that enlightenment strikes suddenly,
unexpectedly, and is not to be "striven for." Both attitudes have their
own truth, obviously.)
cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:35:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: Bruce Burrill <brburl@mailbag.com>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Zen, Buddhism, and Baha'i
Bruce:
Fair enough. In our subsequent dialogue I will try to be bound by your
very reasonable requests.
First, I do not wish to "subsume" Buddhism as a historical religion under
the Baha'i Faith. We will discuss things on the epistemological level of
Nasut/ordinary human understanding accessible to us all. My current
discussions are anyway not about what Baha'is call progressive
revelation, but are an exercise in comparative religions. While each is
unique and should be understood in its own particularity, context, and
developmental stages, surely each is not completely incomprehensible to
people of other traditions. And if each is comprehensible, then there
may be structures of thought and perception which, if they cannot be
identical, are nevertheless similar or analogous. It is such analogues
that I wish to discuss as between Zen and Baha'i texts. Of course, I may
misunderstand one or both traditions and so may stumble into a false
analogy. The point of posting these preliminary observations is to get
feedback.
One of my motives for all this is that I feel that the American Baha'i
tradition has on the whole become so fixated on administration,
committees, and vague future utopias, that it has lost sight of the
strong emphasis in Baha'i texts on `irfan or mystical insight. I had a
very powerful experience of `irfan when I was 19, while reading the Book
of Certitude. It was a mixture of ecstasy and ineffability, and when I
returned to ordinary consciousness a sublime certitude had settled over
me. I have in subsequent years had further such "peak experiences" as
Maslow called them. One was provoked by Beethoven's violin concerto.
Except in Omaha, I don't get a sense that such experiences are at the
core of most Baha'is' lives. I think that a tradition like Zen, which
focuses on their analogues, has a great deal to teach us about
spirituality. Ironically, as we learn more of the Baha'i texts in their
original languages and contexts, the Sufi or `Irfan emphases in them
become more and more clear and it seems obvious that the American Baha'i
community in particular has simply missed the boat here. So, I want to
appeal to Zen to "bring out" certain aspects of our own tradition, which
are much more difficult to see if one only approaches them from the point
of view of conservative Protestantism).
As for the issue of which Zen, surely this can be handled by simply
specifying that such and such an idea is especially stressed by Dogen or
by Hakuin or is in the Mumonkan koan collection but not elsewhere.
Academic scholars usually make such distinctions, and I will try to,
where I know enough to do so. An example was my earlier discussion of ku
or the Japanese Zen conception of emptiness, which I explicitly
attributed to the influence of Taoism and which I was careful to
distinguish from S'unyata in South Asian Buddhism; I have read Nagarjuna
quite a lot, and do not need to be told that in many ways "Ku" reverses
the South Asian idea. But it is Ku that I was discussing, and I made
that clear. And I do think that "Ku" resonates with the Sufi and Baha'i
conception of the divine Void, `ama'. That is not to say that the two
are the same or equivalent, only that there is some use in thinking about
them in the same frame.
cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 10:55:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: theo <HGEYER@KENTVM.KENT.EDU>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Standpoint epistemology
Theo: I thought that a very insightful reading of what I was trying to
say and do.
Human beings are very complex. We increasingly understand that the Left
brain, with its language center in the Broca area and its mathematical
abilities, thinks differently from the Right brain, with its intuitions
and its closer connection to the emotions. Of course, the two are
connected by the corpus collosum. But each is modular and thinks
differently.
What I was calling Nasut broadly corresponds to left-brain thinking,
which is what dominates academic discourse. To give an example, from
this point of view the decline of monarchy is intimately related to the
rise of capitalism and then industrialization, creating a powerful
bourgeoisie and new working classes, all of whom demanded participatory
government.
When Shoghi Effendi in *Promised Day is Come* speaks of the monarchs
being cast down by the winds of the Will of God, he is speaking the
language of the Right brain, of a purposive cosmos and divine
righteousness working itself out in history. This is the plane of
malakut or jabarut.
In order to be whole human beings, we must acknowledge and satisfy both
halves of our brains (which are sites of discourse and consciousness that
enable different spiritual faculties to be expressed). But I do not
think we can usefully synthesize the two. I think they should be kept
separate, because they are fundamentally incompatible. They have to
coexist and each must be acknowledged, but they are like bifocals; you
can only look through one set of lenses at a time, and which you look
through will depend on whether you wish to read or look out on a
landscape, in other words, it will depend on your particular purpose at
that moment. Sometimes, as when I write academic historiography, I have
left-brain, nasut purposes. Sometimes, as when I write Baha'i theology,
I have right-brain malakut/jabarut purposes. Baha'is who insist that
there is ether because `Abdu'l-Baha uses the word are like someone trying
to read a close-up book from the top lenses of his bifocals. It just
blurs everything.
My insistence that the two cannot be completely synthesized has some
basis in the scientific literature. When persons have had their corpus
callosums severed, experiments have shown that when shown something the
left brain (right hand) has drawn, the right brain (left eye) often
cannot comprehend it and makes up a symbolic story to explain it away.
cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 15:32:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: "Eric D. Pierce" <PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu>
Subject: Re: Re (2): Judy's paper on Babism
Eric: Thanks; yes, there is going to be trouble about the Langness
business. I think it is time we all put our foot down.
cheers Juan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:26 1995
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 15:42:01 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: Donald Zhang Osborn <osborndo@pilot.msu.edu>
Subject: Re: Tolerant vs. Righteous on Talisman?
Donald: I haven't seen the Thiam book. Burhaan wa Tibyaan is a Baha'i
book in the form of a dialogue between a Muslim and a Baha'i, for
teaching the Faith to Arabic speakers. The other two are polemics
against the Faith; one of them I think is Ahmadi and probably translated
into Arabic from Urdu.
As you say, Arabic and Persian Muslim polemics against the Baha'i faith
are a dime a dozen, a real industry, and it is natural that this should
spill over into French in North and West Africa.
I'm not sure why Baha'u'llah's keeping a low profile in 1844-1850 should
be a criticism of the Faith. After all, it was the *Bab's*
dispensation. As for Azal, there is no reason to think the Bab appointed
him to be Vicar as opposed to being a sort of first among equals among
surviving Babis, and Baha'u'llah explicitly denies the former. Besides,
Azal was both despicable and inept, a deadly combination for a leader,
and he got the obscurity he richly deserves. Thiam should try reading
Azal--it is godawful prose and poetry and absolute nonsense.
cheers Juan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:27 1995
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 17:37:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: Roxanne Lalonde <Roxanne.Lalonde@UAlberta.CA>
Subject: Re: Greetings, etc.
I'd be glad to talk to her if she wants to talk. But she rather put me
off with that business about Baha'u'llah being "ruthless" and she has to
agree to be more considerate if we are to communicate.
You call her a "scholar". What is her field?
Juan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:27 1995
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 23:59:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: "Timothy A. Nolan" <tan1@cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: new scholarly paradigm
Timothy:
Thanks for your delightful posting. Put this way, I don't have a problem
with anything you said. I wish everyone would put it your way.
cheers Juan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:27 1995
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 18:50:26 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: Burl Barer <burlb@bmi.net>
Subject: Re: Half-esoteric
Burl:
I think it is very difficult for the Baha'i Faith as currently
constituted to have genuine scholars in the sense Judy implies. The
demand that everything be Reviewed is a demand that everything be
censored, which is contrary to the practices of academic scholarship.
The House won't release key primary sources like Nabil in Persian, much
less allow them to be translated and discussed. All the forums for free
inquiry Baha'i intellectuals have tried to set up over the years have
essentially been closed down, with the exception of Talisman, and I think
the likelihood that it, too, will be closed down is about 50/50. So far
Baha'is either have academics who do not write about the Faith (e.g.
Kazemzadeh) but who are closely integrated into the community; or they
have academics who do write about the Faith but become alienated, such as
MacEoin. And it is the censorship practices, closed MS and document
archives, and rather narrow-minded, anti-intellectual attitudes of many
Baha'is that alienates them. There are a few of us who try to walk a
tightrope in between, but it is a tightrope and it is easy to fall off or
be pushed off, as with John's Encyclopaedia. I'll keep you posted how it
works out.
In the meantime, I'm personally insulted by Judy's observation and
suggest humbly she look up my journal articles.
cheers Juan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:27 1995
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 10:58:56 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: "Stephen R. Friberg" <friberg@will.brl.ntt.jp>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Science, unity, diversity, and religion
I appreciated both Carmen's and Stephen's responses to my posting on
standpoint epistemologies.
I think there are actually three approaches common among Baha'is. The
first identifies propositions in scripture as literally true, and where
they appear to contradict findings of science, science is pronounced
wrong. This approach leads to a belief in chemical alchemy, Baha'i
cosmology as literal astronomy, etc.
The second insists that all propositions in scripture are true, and if
they conflict with science is is because we have not understood the
science well enough or we have not understood the propositions well
enough, or the propositions are metaphorical, or referring to some higher
plane of reality, etc. This position is more sophisticated than the
first, but seems to me to result in illogical statements, such as "X may
on the surface appear to be in conflict with science but it is not really
if we understand it spiritually." Typically this sort of statement is
simply made, without any demonstration. The crowd who subscribes to
Scientific American would slice such an argument into little tiny pieces.
The third approach, which I have advocated, is grounded in Baha'u'llah's
own Writings, such as His Tablet to Jamal-i Burujirdi, and is based on
the idea of standpoint epistemology. Baha'u'llah says that each of us
knows and speaks from a particular *maqam* or spiritual/intellectual
*station*, and this explains why there is such disagreement among
individuals. Past religions, as with the Inquisition, have assumed that
scriptural propositions are inherently true and that there is only one
plane of truth, and so everyone must be made to acknowledge that truth.
Baha'u'llah's standpoint epistemology allows for different planes of
discourse, and admits that the same proposition might be true on one
plane but untrue on another. It is precisely this theory of knowledge
that underpins Baha'u'llah's conviction that the religions are one. He
knew the world religions very well, and was perfectly aware of all the
contradictions among them. He simply attributed them to differences of
perceptual station. One can easily apply this idea. It is well known
that the Gospel of Mark has a "low" Christology, seeing Christ as a man
with a special mission; whereas the Gospel of John divinizes Christ.
Aristotle would say you had to choose between these two stances, that
only one proposition can be true. Baha'u'llah's (and Ibn al-`Arabi's)
standpoint epistemology would allow both propositions to be true,
depending on the station in which they were uttered. Thus, John's
assertion of Christ's divinity is untrue on Mark's station, and Mark's
assertion of Jesus's mere humanity is untrue on John's station.
So I would reply to Carmen that not every proposition is true or
meaningful on every plane, even if scripture is multivalent, having many
possible meanings.
As for science, remember that I am a social scientist, and I am telling
you all that many scriptural propositions are not meaningful if taken in
a positivist way, even if they are very satisfying spiritually.
The case of the outbreak of disease in Shiraz after the Bab's arrest
there is a case in point. I think attributing the epidemic to the arrest
is a perfect example of right-brain thinking. It is very satisfying
emotionally to know that a wicked people who attacked an innocent prophet
was immediately punished in this way. And, of course, the Bible and the
Qur'an are full of this sort of thinking.
But it would be a mistake to take the proposition literally on the level
of Nasut or ordinary physical/human reality, or to try to reconcile it
with logical, left-brain thinking.
Let us say I am writing a paper on the demographic history of 19th
century Iran (which I might well do). I will point out that population
growth was slow before about 1850, owing to the periodic outbreak of what
appears to have been cholera. There may also have been some lingering
plague outbreaks. Cholera is caused by a bacteria and passed from person
to person, especially in crowded and dirty conditions in cities and
villages. Pastoral nomads (one half to one third of the population) did
not suffer from these outbreaks, being outdoors away from vermin and
close human contact, and the tribes may have been strengthened against
the settled population partially because they were less at risk for
disabling epidemics, and so could sweep down on afflicted cities and
villages weakened by them. The Shi`ite custom of rolling a dead relative
up in a carpet and transporting him by camel back or cart to the Shi`ite
shrines of Najaf and Karbala in Ottoman Iraq may also have been
responsible for spreading disease (which is one reason Baha'is were
ordered buried where they died). And, of course, there was the 1845
epidemic in Shiraz, which was caused by the imprisonment of the Bab.
Now, if you are not jarred by the last sentence, then you are not
thinking clearly. In the context of this paragraph, which is written
from a social-scientific point of view, the last sentence is not
meaningful. It has wandered in from another language game. It belongs
to the theology of history, not to historical demographics. Within the
language-game of the theology of history, the statement is meaningful,
and "true." But not if uttered as part of a scientific paper.
I do not personally believe there is any meta-language game in which both
these discourses are simultaneously true. I think you have to decide
which maqam you are speaking from; which side of the brain you're giving
the reins to; which language game you are going to play; and then you
have to stick to it until you have finished making your point. This is
not to say that you have to banish right-brain insights altogether, but
if you are writing science then the left brain had better be in the
driver's seat. Otherwise you get false syllogisms of a sort the right
brain rather likes (grass is green, lagoon water is green, therefore
lagoon water is sea-grass), and which make for great poetry, but very bad
science. On the other hand, if you insist on writing poetry with only
your left brain, you will get very bad poetry.
And precisely the problem with the quashing of the Baha'i Encyclopaedia
is that some form of approach #1 above has been adopted by some powerful
Baha'is who intend to ram it down the rest of our throats, and who have
simply misunderstood Baha'u'llah and the implications of His approach to
knowledge. They have therefore disallowed academic Baha'i discourse and
collapsed all discourse to a single, limited maqam, that of their own
perceptual station. This sort of thing was what Baha'u'llah disliked in
past religions such as Islam, and was what he was trying to avoid in
founding the Baha'i Faith. It just goes to show that the recuperative
powers of religious fundamentalism are vast and even the intentions of
the Manifestation of God can be set aside and subverted very easily.
cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:27 1995
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:27 1995
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 11:22:11 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: StrayMutt@aol.com
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Baha'i Bill of Rights/criminal code
Bob: Thanks for your keen comments on my list of punishable offenses, as
revealed by the practice of the beloved Guardian.
I agree with you that we need a Baha'i bill of rights that is based on
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and analogous statements in the
Writings. However, I think voluntary private organizations such as
religions are different from states and that therefore a Baha'i bill of
rights would have to be crafted to fit Baha'i circumstances.
But my point in that posting was to suggest that we *also* need a
written-down criminal code. As Sen and others have said, the code
should specify the offenses that would be *sufficient* for the
removal of rights, while noting that these offenses do not, depending
on the circumstances, *necessitate* the removal of rights.
When an NSA summarily announces that it is
removing a believer's rights, the believer should be able to ask "Under
what article and section of Baha'i canon law?" If the NSA cannot cite
article and section, it should not be able to proceed. As you point out,
as things now stand, an NSA can remove a believer's rights for looking at
them squint-eyed, and if the House is too busy to take the appeal, there
is nothing the believer can do about it. Those Baha'is who naively think
such things cannot happen do not know much about recent Baha'i history,
not only in the U.S. but elsewhere.
cheers Juan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:27 1995
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 12:10:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: Burl Barer <burlb@bmi.net>
Subject: Re: Science, unity, diversity, and religion
Dearest Burl: Thank you very, very much for the encouraging reply. And,
I would be honored to have you use anything I have written for Talisman
any way you like. I renounce copyright on Talisman postings, so you know
you have carte blanche to use them.
The last paragraph no doubt had a lot of emotional sea-grass in it. I'm
mad about the NSA threatening to take away a talismanian's administrative
rights for writing an account of history they disagreed with!
cheers Juan
From jrcole@umich.eduSat Nov 25 16:58:27 1995
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 13:13:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu>
To: "Marguerite K. Gipson" <margreet@margreet.seanet.com>
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: quick note
Marguerite: This is of course an honor bestowed upon stalwarts by
Sherman the Cat. Ever since he read Ahmad's paper on the Seed of
Creation we have been unable to get him to bestow it on women.
:-)
cheers Juan