Logs of Talisman Discussions of Bahai Faith 4/96
From TLCULHANE@aol.comTue Nov 28 10:16:18 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:36:38 -0500
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: neoplatonism pt 2
Dear Nima ,
Whew i'm getting a brain cramp :)
First an easy one . Do you or anyone else know if there is an English
translation of Mahmud Shabestari's _Rose Garden of Mystery_ ? I was
wondering if the Tablet in Gleanings p 319 -322 plays off of some of the
Shabestari imagery . " In the Rose garden of Changeless Splendor . .."
Now if Avicenna identifies the Active Intellect with the Angel Gabriel
with the Source of Revelation would it not be safe to say that I can
identitfy the "Maiden " with the Active Intellect as the Source of Revelation
? A further fascinating tidbit along this line is the ancient Babylonian
goddess Ishtar. She is the lawgiver and judge as well as the god of love . a
la Baha u llah in Epistle speaking as the "lawgiver " and " truth seeker
mystic " .
Suhrawardi - Could you elaborate a little on the essence /existence issue
which you said Mulla Sadra reverses ?
The Light image appeals to me . Somewhere I read about the Light of Glory
- Xharneh ? I am intrigued by this because of the Glory of God . I mean the
title has become a name and I suspect there is a Theophany hidden somewhere
in here that has been inadvertantly delated from consciousness . We have the
exoteric Baha ullah - Husayn Ali 's physical presence - whoops there's that
* Presence of Being*deal . We have the esoteric BAHA U LLAH and She (symbol
:) ) seems to have been left out of our common consciousness . I am wondering
if some of Baha u llah's references to BAHA U LLAH are not in fact
Theophonic references that ought not to be confused with or limited too Baha
u llah . As I recall from a while back Shekhinah in the Old Testament also
was understood as Glory.
Also you mentioned a similarity in the roor for "Ishraq" and " Mashriq "
. If I understood correctly then the "house" the dawning point is intimately
connected to "illumination " or the "enlightenment" Juan is referring to in
his Zen comments .
Back to * The Presence of Being * - I am still *tasting* this one wow
! . How does this relate to essence / existence ? Since I talked your ear
off this week end perhaps you will indulge me and talk mine off on this
subject . As I mentioned i am trying to make sense of my experiences and as
Juan noted we lack a " Pir" I must rely on some of the philosophers/
theosophers to help me sort this out . In the imaginal world if it is
related to Plato's forms- would the pure intelligences be similar to the
"Names " or forms of my Lord/ Being ? Perhaps my experince has something to
do with that ?
More questions after I ponder your responses and comments to these . Any
one else with helpful thoughts please feel free to join in .
warm regards ,
Terry
From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpTue Nov 28 10:18:03 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 15:43:01 JST
From: "Stephen R. Friberg"
To: Juan R Cole
Cc: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Talisman rights
Dear Juan:
I'm not worried about John's actions, and, to be honest, I didn't get the
impression that anybody else was either. Rather, I got the strong
impression that you and Linda were, and are, overreacting to rather
innocent comments, and reading them differently than they were intended.
By the way, I bought Gadamer's "Philosophical Hermeneutics".
Hermeneutics is all about the process of "digging out" meaning
from sometimes otherwise undecipherable text. Applying it to
your and Linda's postings (and thanks to copious hints), I think
I have figured out the situation. Gambate! (good luck), as they
say in Japan.
Re: "*But*, with all due love, affection and buddha-mind, I must take
the strongest possible exception to your statement that my proposed bill
of rights would have made John Walbridge's actions impossible."
Juan, my reply, with equal love, affection, and buddha-mind is that
you should avoid misrepresenting people's comments, as you do in the
statement above. I said no such thing.
I think its fine for polemics: basically you take what someone says,
rephrase it so it seems a more extreme position, and then attack it.
But such polemical methods prevent, rather than promote, under-
standing. For the same reasons I distrust Rush Limbaugh, I don't
like them. And I'll complain if they are used against me.
What I do like is your marvelous comments on mystical truths.
Yours with warmth and love,
Stephen F.
From TLCULHANE@aol.comTue Nov 28 10:23:01 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 02:07:11 -0500
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
To: jrcole@umich.edu
Subject: papers /footnotes
Juan : I was going to put my paper / presentation in the mail when I
realized there were no footnotes - and knowing how historians appreciate
sources :) I am putting together a quick version of notes . I will have it
sent in tomorrows mail .
Texas was enjoyable , mostly due to my conversations with Nima and Chris
. I was trying to convince Nima there is a distinction to be made between
the North American version of the Enlightenment and the French one and that
we ought to be looking to marry Ibn Arabi and Jefferson . I am beginning to
think that this is a fruitful metaphor for my understanding of Baha u llah
.
Oh I am also playing with a notion on Shoghi Effendi and Theocracy . I
have been pondering this since last winter :) . It goes something like this
- The Baha i's of the West being involved in building administration,as was
the Guardian , and lacking a reasonably develped sense of Irfan missed or
reduced the the discussion of the Guardian to political theocracy when in
fact what he "meant" was theocracy in the theophanic sense or best sense of
theocracy the "pouring " of the Spirit into all spheres of human existence .
So there is a theocracy ancticipated by the Guardian " recognition " and
"observance" of the Aqdas ( the Most Holy ) into an energized and
reconstructed existence . This ought not to be confused with the Admin Order
. I hope to go thru the WOB letters and reinterpret some of the passages
along those lines. At least that is my half baked thought for now . There
are some interesting passages where he makes reference to a series of things
or qualities that go beyond the scope of administration or the internal
workings of the Bahai community and i would argue can only be understand in
light of this broader sense of Theocracy .
Looks like the ante has been upped a bit over the week end .
warm regards,
Terry
From CMathenge@aol.comTue Nov 28 10:24:33 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 02:32:48 -0500
From: CMathenge@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: ???
Dear Ruth,
You sound like a lot of fun--welcome to Talisman!
Well, I met Burl at the recent ABS conference and I'll verify some of what he
says. He IS pretty good-looking. I've heard some strange things about his
table manners, but then that's only rumours. Elf-hairs, huh? Well, he does
have a sort of unidentifiable alien look . . .hmmm. On the other hand he
claims to be a writer, and if you noticed he just used the word "papaucity"
in one of his posts. Now where did you get that Burl? That right there is
enough to make you wonder about his credentials. Now when it comes to
bragging about his children, I have FOUR kids who are African American and
I'm not--and they're not adopted. :-)
By the way, I had one of those pretty rainbow bumper stickers that say
"Celebrate Diversity" on my car--bought it at the Baha'i Center--and one day
it disappeared. I thought somebody had stolen it because they liked it so
much. Or else because they were racists. Come to find out, my son was
driving the car in Hollywood one night and people kept honking and yelling at
him. Turns out it is similar to a bumper sticker a number of gays have on
their cars here. Brian was embarrassed so he removed it. Meanwhile, I had
bought another one to replace it. I hope nobody will accuse me of being
homophobic, but my son borrows my car a lot and I don't want him to get shot
at, so I think I had better not put it back. (In L.A. you can get shot at if
someone doesn't like the color of your car, your cap, your face, or just
because you stopped at MickeyD's--that's bad enough--and because I have three
kids (25, 22, and 19) driving around L.A. and they all have a propensity to
run around at night and sleep in the day time, I worry a lot.) What do
you-all think out there? Do I have a moral obligation to stick to my guns
and keep the bumper sticker, or should I be a coward and leave it off?
With loving Baha'i greetings,
Carmen
From CMathenge@aol.comTue Nov 28 10:24:40 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 02:32:44 -0500
From: CMathenge@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: mating--er? services
I must say this thread has me chuckling. Although "mating" services may on
the whole be an appropriate title, aren't they usually referred to as
"dating" services?
Carmen
From burlb@bmi.netTue Nov 28 10:37:14 1995
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 23:56 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: CMathenge@aol.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Papaucity
Carmen said of Burl:
" he claims to be a writer, and if you noticed he just used the word
"papaucity" in one of his posts. Now where did you get that Burl? That
right there is
>enough to make you wonder about his credentials.
Burl says:
Concerning "papaucity":
"pap" noun = a nipple of the breast; a teat; something resembling or shaped
like a teat.
"paucity" =scarcity
Here we see Mr. Barer inventing a word which conveys the essence of the
sentence --" my buddy Chet came to me and bewailed the papaucity of single
Baha'i females". This proves that Mr. Barer, elf-hairs and all, is a writer.
It also proves that he can't spell, Eudora has no spell checker, and he is
quick to come to his own defense.
Burl (refusing to pay sintax) Barer
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.eduTue Nov 28 10:39:51 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 02:18:05 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: Juan R Cole
Cc: jwalbridge@indiana.edu, lwalbridge@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Collective Punishment
Dear Juan,
You wrote:
>
> Saman: You may know that a Talismanian has been threatened by the NSA
> with loss of his administrative rights over a posting he did. The NSA
> differed with him over his account of a historical incident and demanded
> that he recant it publicly here on Talisman.
>
> Since the National Center has violated Talisman etiquette, I think John
> acted properly. It is not an unreasonable conclusion that National was
> monitoring Talisman through its subscribers there, which is how the NSA
> got the Talisman posting in the first place.
>
>
> cheers Juan
>
Thanks for the clarification - I did not know the above (though
a disturbing feeling is dawning over me).
I would like to make a suggestion: that John request that the
National Assembly post their version of the disputed fact on
Talisman.
take care,
sAmAn
From 100735.2257@compuserve.comTue Nov 28 10:40:02 1995
Date: 28 Nov 95 03:45:07 EST
From: "H.C. deFlerier deCourcelles" <100735.2257@compuserve.com>
To: Juan R Cole
Subject: Re: Talisman rights
> The cries of outrage over John's reconsideration of subscription rights
> of persons who work for the issuer of the threat would be much muted
> among civilized persons if the full facts were known.
Cher Monsieur,
Why are those facts not published?
Luxembourg City Sincerely,
28-Nov-'95 H-C. de Flerier
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comTue Nov 28 10:40:15 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 00:44:31 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Bosch Relationship Weekend Update .
Dear Talismanians
Although Ahmad standing on the runway in Sydney
awaiting the two 747 carrying the Ahmad crazed
Ladies to down - under is not coming to the
Relationship weekend . I am pleased to say that <
to Linda's dismay >, more men are now coming . It
promises to be a wonderful weekend and we shall
explore the Writings . To discover how to put into
practice the Personal Teachings and so improve all
our relationships .
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut.
Book for the Weekend via Bosch only $85.00 food
and lodging .
Tel 408-423-3387
Fax 408-423-7564
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzTue Nov 28 10:43:46 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 23:06:00 +1200
From: Robert Johnston
To: Burl Barer , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: threats against the folks conviviating
OK Burl,
Re:
>If some man or woman arrives brandishing a weapon, making threats against
>the folks conviviating over the guacamole, John would assuredly either (a)
>insist that the leave at once, or (b) ask Linda the Catholic Shi'ite Ninja
>to make sure they leave at once.
Fair point. There's quite a bit of heat in this matter, and it is probably
good that everyone has their say, whatever their say is. I and several
others have expressed alarm at the fact several innocent guests had to be
thrown out with the offender. But, y'know: it is a tough and cruel world.
And John HAS left the door open for those who have been thrown out to
negotiate their way back in...
I think the lasting significance of this event could lie in the fact that
it gives us a fine example of an instance where a plebiscite (referendum of
all constituents) need not be held before a situation is assessed, and a
judgement is come to and acted upon. Bob Ballinger (for one) has loudly
asked for a legitimate instance of this, and now he has it...maybe.
Perhaps some of those who have questioned this kind of activity on the part
of assemblies will become less critical. Maybe John's "benign
dictatorship" carries an important lesson from the Cosmic Jester. AUM.
;-\}
Robert.
From margreet@margreet.seanet.comTue Nov 28 10:44:05 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 04:38:15 -0800
From: "Marguerite K. Gipson"
To: RUTH E CLARK , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: introduction
Hello Ruth, I am in the same boat you are, girlfriend... I have known
Burl since the early 70's and he just became a Bahai, I knew him as a DJ
for a local radio show. But I am enjoying his literary pieces tremendously,
this is a new side to him I had not known about. I just wish I could
afford his dang ol book... As for the others, I do not know them. I have
usually not a clue one about what half these folks talk about. I just enjoy
the reading. It causes me to think a bit..... and to distract me from my
other important duties I have too.... I have the feeling that even if my
brain cannot soak up all this, my soul does somehow. Keep up the good
work. My other wish is to go to Bosch one of these days. I am only 24
hours away... I never have been there. Say Derek, do you serve
lattes???? Or do I need to bring my machine????
Margreet
Wet, soggy, foggy, Seattle WA
At 09:33 PM 11/27/95 EST, RUTH E CLARK wrote:
>Dear People,
>
>I have not prepared a bio yet. But, I will tell you that I live in
>Research Triangle area in North Carolina. I am not a Baha'i. I am an
>African-American. I work at a large corporation and am single.
>I viewed talisman for awhile through a friend decided to join.
>I am good friends with Baha'is and enjoy their firesides.
>
>Now, I like to share some thoughts between Research Triangle and
>Research Triangle Experts on talisman. To begin with I think Burl is
>actually Phil Donahue, Derek could be Geraldo Rivera and this Quanta
>probably is either Oprah or Sally Jessy Raphael in disguise.
>They keep sharing thier social research findings on talisman by
>"telling it all" and I can't make a sense of what they say.
>I have sympathy with Ayla and I bet she doesn't go anywhere with
>Mother Yentle/Fidllerette on the Roof. I hope SHE DOES NOT HIDE IN A
>CAVE
>
>RUTH
>
From clarkre@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduTue Nov 28 10:44:22 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 08:40:27 EST
From: RUTH E CLARK
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Christian, and non-white
Dear Robert,
No I am not green yet. But, I may be when I get jealous.
>So, I'm father Christmas rather than a sinner falling into fires...
Well, it depends what sin and which fires.....????
>I am prejudiced in favor of anyone that can make me laugh.
That's good, keep on laughing, I can take it.
I don't get this "hiding" business. Are we having some cultural
communication problems here?
I hope you are a batchelor, there is no confusion here dear!
keep on smilin and don't worry about them wrinkles,
yours cheerfully,
Ruth
From belove@sover.netTue Nov 28 10:45:17 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 09:23:23 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: Robert Johnston
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: My Goodness Sakes!
Dear Robert,
I'd just read the section of your posting: " drove into isolation for
many
years. But the personal cost of this was too high."
... and was saying to myself, "After all the winks and endearments,
Robert flashes his scar tissue.,"
I like this side of you. I find a similar dimension in so many of
the talismanians, it's that (pounding the table with a fist,here) "
Dammit this stuff really matters."
>From time to time in this charming, witty and elegant etheric salon
I've bent over and showed the gang just where I was bit and how much
it hurt. It's comforting for me to see it in otheres,because I
sometimes wonder whether I'm a damn fool because of my
vulnerabilities. (Guy stuff, I'm sure.) I often remember Beauregard
the Houn' Dawg in Pogo. He used to recite a poem called "Ole Dawg
Trey" and never could get through the poem without blubbering, big
eyes filled with tears. So I do wonder whether I'm being maudlin.
So I'm glad to here a few emotional outbursts now and then. Makes it
all feel real to me.But, just as I think, with almost sensual
pleasure, that old Robert is leading us all down to another level of
Real, comes this phrase:
" ... "I'm
not buying into your crap" dimension that was lacking before. This
enables me to survive in community. (Philip would die at some of my
bluntness!)..."
... and I find myself cast in the role of Church Lady!
Am I being nominated to the role of He who objects to
doodoo-esqueries?
Sorry sweet Robert. You made the pie. You have to lick your own
fingers.
Love
Philip.
------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 11/28/95
Time: 09:23:23
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
From dawnliqu@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduTue Nov 28 10:45:45 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:08:18 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: The truth
Dear Ruth and Friends,
I am beginning to really like what is going on Talisman lately.
Well, as for Mother Yentle fiddling on the roof, I quit, I promise!!
We scared poor Ahmad away. Ayla is mad at me too .
Also, Ruth was just kidding about her views on Quanta, believe me,
she is like my sister. So, no more pretentions. Behave yourself Ruth! Now comes the truth.
.
My friend Ruth who thinks I am Oprah knows better. But, "ladies
and gentleman heeeeeere is Quanta!" sounds pretty good to me.
Well, as the saying goes, a family that talks together stays together. Or, else
Or, they'll wash the laundry on Oprah and put it on-line
for drying, before the world. Is there a lesson in this?
Dear Robert, you are in big trouble now. She got eyes on you.
She is a beautiful, slender, easy-going lady with gorgeous eyes.
What is so funny is that, she is a bit shy around people.
Oh my goodness, here I go again. I think she is right, I cannot
help it. Well, good luck in your new friendship. You asked for it.
I wish all of you a Happy Holiday Season from cyberspace.
Sorry, no poems coming my way these days. I used to even get up
in the middle of the night to write them. My heart and brain
are on a well deserved vacation. So, I'm gonna take it easy, now.
lovingly,
quanta...(*_*)
From JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduTue Nov 28 10:46:41 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 09:32:15 EWT
From: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Ninjas
I don't not normally reply to Burl's comments about my wife, but he
has correctly intuited that when blasts of anger are needed to intimidate
the unrighteous, I turn to my good wife. This is known quite illogically
in the family as "the Syrian border-guard" routine after an incident early in
our relationship when Linda dealt with a German railroad conductor
who wished to point out that we were on a train for which we did not have
tickets. (There *was* a Syrian border guard, but he appears in a later
incident in which Linda attempted to enter Syria without a passport.
Unlike Burl and Derek's stories about my wife, my stories about her are
actually true for the most part.)
As for the Bab's grammer (which was more objectionable than
Baha'u'llah's), this had to do with the Bab's habit of inventing Arabic
word forms that were possible in theory but did not actually exist in
Arabic. The result was something like the King James Bible as
rewritten by James Joyce.
On another front, I received the following e-mail from my wife:
#21 28-NOV-1995 06:38:15.87 NEWMAIL
From: PO4::"LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu"
To: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
Subj: RE: Scholarship and the Purpose of Talisman
John, I think that was Bev Poden who post that message. Geez L
My apologies to Bev.
Can I sucker anybody into commenting on the Pope's recent claim
concerning the infallibility of the teaching prohibiting women in the
priesthood?
john walbridge
From snoopy@skipper.physics.sunysb.eduWed Nov 29 00:12:27 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 11:08:01 -0500 (EST)
From: Stephen Johnson
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: A common misconception
Linda, in a response to an individual (on a different subject) said:
> By the way, I haven't seen your name on Talisman before. I wonder why
you are
> leaping in now with your thoughts. Have you no other opinions on
anything that > is being discussed here? Linda >
Recall: Baha'u'llah spent many of His pre-declaration days silently
serving the guests while others argued back and forth on the fine points
of islamic and babi jurisprudence, very rarely interjecting to correct a
fine point or right a slight wrong.
Silence does not imply ignorance, nor does it demand interrogation. In
fact, Buddha chose His successor by holding a flower aloft and watching
for the one pupil who simply sat silent and smiled while others tried to
discuss the precise meaning behind his actions.
So to Linda and the many other whose posts I enjoy so much each day:
please be patient with those who do not speak so often. And if they do
speak, do not demand excuses for their sudden contribution. Enjoy it and
foster their confidence in being a contributor to this fine discussion
group -- otherwise you may not hear from them again....and listening to
the same 20 people every day has got to get boring.
[An aside for Linda: Unfortunately yours was the most recent letter that
provoked this response in which I hope you will read much love and
respect (for both of these qualities I hold for you). Please do not take
this response as a personal attack as it was not intended such.]
your devoted friend,
stephen johnson
Dept of Physics
SUNY Stony Brook
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduWed Nov 29 00:13:15 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 10:34:23 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: I'm trying
All right, folks, I'm trying (very trying, I suppose many of you would say). I
will try to refrain from leaping in to defend my husband's actions.
This just became a pattern very early in our marriage when we were doing a lot of
travelling. I saved John from being thrown off a train in Germany once by
lunging at the conductor's eyes with my fingernails. I broke through a line of
male students at the American University of Beirut to get into a building where
I thought John was being hostage. (It turned out he was safely in the library
reading). He swears that I once threw him across the room to save him from
bombing by the Israelis. So, I guess this description of me as a Catholic,
Shi'ite Ninja is not the worst thing that has ever been said about me.
Juan and John have eloquently chimed in with explanations on the actions of
removing someone from Talisman. I will say no more - except one thing. There
is a big difference between a single individual (with no real power) performing
an action, and an institution with tremendous power and prestige doing it.
All right. I have had my say and I apologize if I offended anyone with my
comments. Linda
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduWed Nov 29 00:13:27 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 10:38:11 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Relationship conference
Dear Derek, just a private note between you and me. Aren't you glad that Bosch
hired me to advertize this conference. See, it worked. More guys are signing
up now. If you want me to post anything else about it, let me know.
About Amanda, tell her I am sorry I used her name but it was the first one to
come to my mind. It's not the horses that keep her from coming to the
conference, though, Derek. She still hasn't forgiven you for the time you
bribed her little brother to put that dead, smelly turtle under her pillow.
And you know as well as I do that there were many other episodes like this. I
promise never to mention them on Talisman, if you promise to be quiet about my
antics. Love, Linda
From jjensen@welchlink.welch.jhu.eduWed Nov 29 00:14:10 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 11:24:41 -0500 (EST)
From: Joan Jensen
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: 25 points, YES!!
On Mon, 27 Nov 1995, Burl Barer wrote:
> It is really weird. If I don't shave my ears,
> I look like Lawrence Talbot (for 25 points, tell us his
> middle name) during a full moon.
Dear Burl,
My guess is that you are not referring here to the famous Professor of
Mechanical Engineering at UC Berkley, Lawrence FLETCHER Talbot, but to
the even more famous writer of over 100 short stories and articles,
anthologies, novels of science fiction and fantasy,
Edward (Windsel, Jr) Bryant, whose pseudonym is Lawrence
(no middle name) Talbot, born August 1945 in White Plains, New York, and
whose father was a postal worker. He wrote such classics as _Among the
Dead... (1973), _Phoenix without Ashes_ (1975), _Cinnabar_ (1976), and
penned these thoughtful words in the 1980s:
"My wish for the moment is that more good writers in all fields
would toss aside the knee-jerk anti-technology reaction and
exercise a healthy non-judgemental curiosity of an increasingly
complex and fascinating universe."
But seriously, what I want to know is, when I accumulate enough points
will I get to choose the prize? My thoughts are running wild with the
possibilities. Maybe a discount to your new book _MAN OVERBOARD_;
maybe a scholarship to Menucha next Thanksgiving, overlooking the
Columbia River and only a few miles from the town where I was born;
maybe an introduction to the next lovely and single gentleman who
comes to you for consolation and advice; maybe a cameo appearance in
your next book or posting to talisman (which would undoubtedly assure
my immortality in this world, because I'm sure the archives of these
postings will be examined in minute detail by Baha'i scholars of the
future).
Warmly,
Joan (still hoping to generate some serious discussion to the thread on
bahai-singles, even though I immensely enjoy and invite the ribbing
and joking that occurs as well, with the little nibs of serious advice
subtly inserted) Jensen
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Joan Jensen
Baltimore, Maryland USA
*******************************************************************
"...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 brburl@mailbag.comWed Nov 29 00:14:24 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:30:19 -0600
From: Bruce Burrill
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Please define godhead
Dann May,
Please define godhead so we can all have a common basis from which
to discuss this.
Bruce\'1a
From s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.eduWed Nov 29 00:14:35 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:48:58 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: Juan R Cole
Subject: Re: Collective Punishment
Dear Juan,
Lets hope for the best.
May be the entire NSA should be invited to be online -
I think it would be a disarming gesture.
take care,
sAmAn
From dann.may@sandbox.telepath.comWed Nov 29 00:16:48 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 10:07:25 -0600 (CST)
From: dann.may@sandbox.telepath.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Buddhist quotations
This is mostly for Bev:
Bev, thanks for your kind comments about my efforts to explain my
understanding of Buddhism. Here are some further points of interest:
Like the terms Hindu and Hinduism, the terms Buddhist and Buddhism, are
Western inventions. Most so-called "Buddhists" use the term Buddha-Sasana
(lit. "the Buddha- discipline or rule of life," or "the religion of the
Buddha") when referring to themselves. According to T.O. Ling, The term
implies a whole scheme of moral precepts, devotional practices, meditation,
and social relationships which is regarded as owing its origin to the
Buddha." (_Dictionary of Buddhism_ 52-53)
There are about 303 million Buddhists living mainly in Tibet, China, Japan,
southeastern Asia, India, Indonesia. There are approximately 301 million in
Asia, 520,000 in Latin America, 400,000 in the former Soviet Union, 270,000
in Europe, and 550,000 in North America. The Buddhist teachings may have
influenced Western thought and to some extent, Christianity. According to
the Hindu philosopher Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, one of emperor Ashoka's
(the first Buddhist monarch) inscriptions from the third century BCE record
that "Buddhist missions were sent to the court of the Seleucidae at Antioch
and the court of the Ptolemies at Alexandria" (_East and West in Religion
43_).
According to one Sri Lankan monk, "Buddhism is seeing the world as it is."
For these reasons, it ignores and even rejects most of the metaphysical
speculations, ceremonies and rituals of Hinduism. The Buddha, when asked
about ultimate realities such as the nature of the world, divinity, etc.
often responded as follows:
1. So you see, friends, the things that I know and have not revealed are
more than the truths I know and have revealed. And why have I not revealed
them: Because, friends, there is no profit in them; because they are not
helpful to holiness; because they do not lead from disgust to cessation and
peace, because they do not lead from knowledge to wisdom and Nirvana.
(Samyutta Nikaya)
2. Do not accept what you hear by report, do not accept tradition, do not
accept a statement because it is found in books, nor because it is in
accord with your belief, nor because it is a saying of your teacher. Be
lamps unto yourselves. Those who either now or after I am dead, shall rely
upon themselves, it is they who shall reach the topmost height. (_Some
Sayings of the Buddha_, 1939, p. 283, qtd. in Huston Smith, _The World's
Religions_ 94)
3. It is as if a man has been wounded by an arrow thickly smeared with
poison, and his friends and kinsmen were to get a surgeon to heal him, and
he were to say, I will not have this arrow pulled out until I know by what
man I was wounded, whether he is of the warrior caste, or a brahmin, or of
the agricultural, or the lower caste. Of if he were to say, I will not have
the arrow pulled out until I know of what name of family the man is; -- or
whether he is tall, or short, or of middle height; or whether he is black,
or dark, or yellowish; or whether he comes from such and such a village, or
town, or city; or until I know whether the bow with which I was wounded was
a chapa or a kodanda, or until I know whether the bow-string was of
swallow-wort, or bamboo fiber, or sinew, or hemp, or of milk-sap tree, or
until I know whether the shaft was from wild or cultivated plant, or
whether it was feathered from a vulture's wing or a heron's or a hawk's, or
a peacock's, or whether it was wrapped round with the sinew of an ox, or a
buffalo, or of a ruru-deer, or a monkey; or until I know whether it was an
ordinary arrow, or a razor-arrow, or an iron arrow, or a calf-tooth arrow,
or one of kararina leaf. Before knowing all this, that man would die.
Similarly, it is not on the view that the world is eternal, that it
is infinite, that the body and soul are distinct, or that the Buddha exists
after death that a religious life depends. Whether these views or their
opposites are held, there is still rebirth, there is still old age, there
is still death, and grief, lamentation, suffering, sorrow, and despair. . .
. And why have I not explained this. Because this is not useful, it is not
concerned with the principle of a religious life; does not conduce to
aversion, absence of passion, cessation, tranquility, Nirvana, and
therefore I have not explained it.
And what have I explained? Suffering [dukkha] have I explained, the
cause of suffering, the destruction of suffering, and the path that leads
to the destruction of suffering have I explained. For this is useful, this
is concerned with the principle of a religious life; this conduces to
aversion, absence of passion, cessation, tranquility, supernatural faculty,
perfect knowledge, Nirvana, and therefore I have explained it.
Therefore, consider as unexplained what I have not explained,
consider as explained what I have explained. (Majjhima Nikaya, 1:426 ff,
modified slightly from Thomas, _Buddhist Scriptures_ 65-67)
The First Sermon of the Buddha
There are two extremes, O monks, which the man who has given up the
world ought not to follow. What are the two? That conjoined with the
passions and luxury, low, vulgar, common, ignoble, and unprofitable; and
that conjoined with asceticism, painful, ignoble, and unprofitable.
Avoiding these two extremes the Tathagata [i.e. The Buddha] has gained the
enlightenment of the Middle Path, which produces insight and knowledge, and
tends to calm, to higher knowledge, enlightenment, Nirvana.
And what, O monks, is the Middle Path, of which the Tathagata has
gained enlightenment, which produces insight and knowledge, and tends to
calm, to higher knowledge, enlightenment, Nirvana? This is the noble
Eightfold Way: namely, right views, right intention, right speech, right
action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right
concentration. This, O monks, is the Middle Path, of which the Tathagata
has gained enlightenment, which produces insight and knowledge, and tends
to calm, to higher knowledge, enlightenment, Nirvana.
Now this, O monks, is the noble truth of pain [Sanskrit dukkha]:
birth is painful, old age is painful, sickness is painful, death is
painful, sorrow, lamentation, dejection, and despair are painful. Contact
with unpleasant things is painful, not getting what one wishes is painful.
In short the five groups of grasping [Sanskrit skandhas, the factors which
make up an individual] are painful. Now this, O monks, is the noble truth
of the cause of pain: the craving [Sanskrit tanha], which tends to rebirth,
combined with pleasure and lust, finding pleasure here and there; namely,
the craving for passion, the craving for existence, the craving for
non-existence. Now this, O monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of
pain, the cessation without a remainder of craving, the abandonment,
forsaking, release, non-attachment. Now this, O monks, is the noble truth
of the way that leads to the cessation of pain: this is the noble Eightfold
Way; namely, right views, right intention, right speech, right action,
right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. . .
. (The First Sermon of the Buddha [Dhammacakkappattana-sutta or "The
Setting in Motion of the Wheel of the Dharma"], Samyutta-nikaya 56:2)
Loving Kindness
May all beings be happy and at their ease! May they be joyous and live in
safety. All beings, whether weak or strong -- omitting none -- in high,
middle or low realms of existence, small or great, visible or invisible,
near or far away, born or to be born -- may all beings be happy and at
their ease! Let none deceive another, or despise any being in any state;
let none be angry or ill-will wish harm to another! Even as a mother
watches over and protects her child, her only child, so with boundless mind
should one cherish all living beings, radiating friendliness [metta also
"loving-kindness"] over the entire world, above, below, and all around
without limit; so let him cultivate a boundless goodwill towards the entire
world, uncramped, free from ill-will or enmity. (excerpt from the Metta
Sutta, qtd. in Edward Conze, Buddhism: Its Essence and Development 102)
Buddhist Virtues
1. Do not what is evil. Do what is good. Keep your mind pure. This is
the teaching of the Buddha. (Dhammapada 14:183)
2. There is no fire like lust. There is no evil like hate. There is no
pain like disharmony. There is no joy like Nirvana. The hunger of the
passions is the greatest disease. Disharmony is the greatest sorrow. When
you know this well, then you know that Nirvana is the greatest joy.
(Dhammapada 15:202-3)
3. There is no fire like lust, and no chains like those of hatred.
There is no net like illusion, and no rushing torrent like desire. It is
easy to see the faults of others, but difficult to see one's own faults.
One shows the faults of others like chaff winnowed in the wind, but one
conceals one's own faults as a cunning gambler conceals his dice.
(Dhammapada 18:251-2)
4. Everything, brethren, is on fire. How, brethren, is everything on
fire? the eye, brethren, is on fire, visible objects are on fire, the
faculty of the eye is on fire, the sense of the eye is on fire, and also
the sensation, whether pleasant or unpleasant or both, which arises from
the sense of sight is on fire. with what is it on fire? With the fire of
passion, of hate, of illusion is it on fire, with birth, old age, death,
grief lamentation, suffering, sorrow, and despair. Thus I declare. The eye
is on fire, sounds are on fire [etc. through the other senses] . . . the
wise and noble disciple, brethren, perceiving this, is indifferent to the
eyes, indifferent to visible objects [etc. through the other senses]. ("The
Fire Discourse," Vinaya-Pitaka, Mahavagga 1:21, modified from Thomas,
Buddhist Scriptures 54-55)
5. When the fire of hate, the fire of delusion are extinguished
Nirvan
From brburl@mailbag.comWed Nov 29 00:21:32 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 11:33:25 -0600
From: Bruce Burrill
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Godhead
Dann May,
What can you add to this that may be more recent? What does Tillich
mean by godhead?
----------------------
The Gnostics all began with an utterly incomprehensible reality
which they called the Godhead, since it was the source of the
lesser being that we call "God." There was nothing at all that we
could say about it, since it entirely eludes the grasp of our limited
minds. As Valentinus explained, the Godhead was
perfect and pre-existent . . . dwelling in invisible and
unnameable heights: this is the prebeginning and forefather
and depth. It is uncontainable and invisible, eternal and
ungenerated, is Quiet and deep Solitude for infinite aeons.
With It was thought, which is also called Grace and Silence.
Men have always speculated bout this Absolute, but none of their
explanations have been adequate. It is impossible to describe the
Godhead, which is neither "good" nor "evil,' and cannot even be
said to "exist." Basilides taught that in the beginning, there had
been not God but only the Godhead, which, strictly speaking, was
Nothing because it did not exist in any sense that we can
understand. A HISTORY OF GOD , Karen Armstrong. pp 94-5.
-------------------------
Bruce
From Member1700@aol.comWed Nov 29 00:22:09 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 12:51:28 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: HICKC89@ollamh.ucd.ie, Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Hinnells & UK-NSA. The FACTS?
I will be happy to site my sources of information for the famous Hinnells
affair in the UK. I have heard three accounts of the meeting: one from
Denis himself, one (second-hand through Peter Smith) from one of the Baha'is
who was present, and one (again second-hand through Peter) from Hinnells
himself. None of the accounts differed in any very significant way, and I do
not think that the facts of the case are really in question--just the wisdom
of the NSA's actions.
And since the results of the meeting were an unmitigated disaster, both
in the sense that the meeting did not stop the publication of the chapter in
the book (of course) and badly damaged the reputation of the Faith, it is
hard for me to understand why anyone would defend it. If we are going to
refuse to learn from our mistakes, then we are doomed to repeat them.
Warmest,
Tony
From 100725.315@compuserve.comWed Nov 29 00:22:43 1995
Date: 28 Nov 95 13:35:40 EST
From: sabredance <100725.315@compuserve.com>
To: talisman
Subject: soaps
Talisman often strikes me as another American soap which are, along with the
Australian ones, are offered in huge amounts by our broadcasting stations here
in Europe.
Why soaps? Because of the generous amount of overreaction and emotion displayed!
Lets all live up to the writings and be tolerant, loving, accepting and kind to
each other. And please, let us stop writing threatening and abusive private
mails. That is not exactly in accordance with the station of nobility we are
called to, is it? (or is it called for? called out? called up? called into?
called forward? Running out of prepositions....).
Generally, Talisman seems to be needed, seeing the popularity of this list.
However, I think it would be wise if this same format of list could be moderated
in a different way. It would take a task of John's shoulders, relieve Linda, who
is worried about him, and the responsibility of throwing people off could be
shared. We could have a committee of moderators. Three would seem to be a good
amount.
And it would relieve me of feeling like a white lab mouse every time I read that
talisman is an academical experiment!
Janine van Rooij
amsterdam, the Netherlands.
From 100725.315@compuserve.comWed Nov 29 00:23:16 1995
Date: 28 Nov 95 13:35:32 EST
From: sabredance <100725.315@compuserve.com>
To: talisman
Subject: my goodness sakes
<>
Dear Philip and others,
Believe me, there are many many many Bahais who have suffered and have scars,
gotten in the course of their Bahai life. Even when they don't talk about it.
It is also a realisation of mine, and this may sound harsh, that no new world
order is built without people getting scars. It is part of the process, yet it
is damn painful.
On the other hand, we westerners are also spoiled... look at the people who have
nothing. Not here, but in other countries. Mostly the sun shines there, maybe
that is why they can be so happy and friendly...
(and of course when fury hit them, they can also brutally kill each other, like
Rwanda has shown).
My mother, of whom you cannot say she had an easy life, what with ten children
and hardly any money, often makes a comment in the line (this is not proper
English!) that those who have suffered less complain the hardest when things get
tough. I, as her spoiled tenth one, can easily subscribe to that! However, life
was kind to me and sent me many difficulties, so that I got not too spoiled...
:)
Life is cruel and incomprehensible, especially if we all persist in our old ways
of
dealing with things and forgetting to practice love, forgiveness and tolerance.
Mark Foster posted a few days ago a mail with the heading communication. In it
was a lovely part written by Marian Lippitt. It is sure difficult, yet when you
start practising what she says, the reward is enormous.
Sometimes we have no other choice but to put our bad experiences behind us and
hold firmly on to the cord of love and tenderness, and focusing on what is still
good and beautiful. For me this boils down to belief and trust in God. God is
good, therefore good things will happen in my life as well. I just have to watch
out for them. Count your blessings is a very sound advice. It keeps you from
going mad. I have tried this out. I did not count my blessings for a time... my
God, the dark pit I lived in!!! After some time I realised I could at least try
it..... I mean, this darkness was also not bliss. Well, the sun came back and
things did not actually change, but were easier to bear. And after some time,
things did change! I cannot help but see that there was a connection, like with
eating veggies and healthy food and feeling vigorous and energetic.
Etty Hillesum and Victor Frankl, two people who viewed their World War II camp
experiences as opportunities for growth, for showing forth love and compassion
and forgiveness, can tell us much about trust and belief.
I have come to believe, after many tests, that trust, compassion and love are
some of the true gems and riches in life. After all, these are what the soul
will take with it, after leaving our bodies..... and these will give us
happiness, true happiness, while still in this world.
This all is not intended to silence the mouths of those who *do* suffer! Often
realisation is only born after we have heard the painful stories of others.
much love,
janine van rooij
amsterdam, the netherlands
From HGEYER@KENTVM.KENT.EDUWed Nov 29 00:32:18 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 14:54:30 EST
From: theo cope
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: baha'i-singles
SInce this topic has been broached more than once on this forum, i thought i'd
write with a few words of a personal nature re:Baha'i-SIngles. I used to be a
subscriber, at a time when i really wasn't interested in a relationship, and
was just casually looking in when i spotted a bio that really intrigued me. It
was from one Holly Timberlake, who described herself in words which had such
a deep resonance that i had to respond to her. I mean, in my world, i had met
few women with an undergrad degree in philosophy, who is a counsellor and had
interests in mysticism and now working on her PhD. in psych and human developme
nt.....in my world.
We corresponded, and with the demands of work, Talisman, my children,
and getting to know more of Holly, i dropped off Baha-i-Singles. I had respond
ed to another woman, one who was geographically closer, but there was not the
resonance. As Holly and i began corresponding, the dynamics were intense!!
The first week alone, we shared and communicated in such a depth that was
unknown for such a new relationship...a cyberone at that. We continued to
write, then after two weeks, called and spoke. What a difference this was. It
was another few weeks and we exchanged pictures...and this is a story in its-
self. We initially met on Naw Ruz.
The money was available for Holly to come visit me in Oregon, since she
is in Ohio, and she flew to meet me. Embodiment is a wonderous and challenging
state of being!! We were elevated to another plane of reality for four int-
ense days, then came back to life again forever transformed. The idealized
nature of internet and relationships was a significant factor, as was the very
explicit demand for brutal honesty and openness while communicating via e-mail.
Neither one of us desired the other to portray themselves in ways which were
not honest, as we demanded this of ourselves. We had both been married before,
to Baha'is who were this in name mostly....and we wanted to try the other
approach, and find one who was Baha'i in life and love. This presented another
set of gifts and opportunities/challenges.
I was in Oregon with a secure job playing mailman with the post office, a
house and many friends. We had talked about getting together, but wondered how
this could come about soon, and it was seen that to do so, i would take the
leap of faith and move to Ohio, even without a job. The house i owned sold in
10 days......there was not much to say i shouldn't go to Ohio, and the kids
acquiesced and we made the journey. This has been three months ago now.
Holly and i will be joined in marriage on Dec. 16th, here in Ohio, and then
we have the bounty of merging two independent people, two households, four
children (two mine, one hers and another hers only part time at home), and it
is intense. I will say this: the law of chastity is one which allows energy
for deep soul issues to come to light. I will be very occupied on the night
of the 16th, please do not call!!! :-)
So, as an endorsement for Baha'i singles network, this is. As a warning
to the dynamics, this is also. Honesty, the ability to see deeply within one's
own soul, the ability to speak and respond to one's shadow issues is a very
essential aspect of moving from cyber-space to embodiment. And, it is very
clear to me the metaphor of the group name..."Baha'i singles", this structures
things differently that if it was single Baha'is, as it seems to keep Baha' in
the forefront.
Margreet...you can forward this to the singles group, and Holly and i may sit
and compose something for there about this dynamic, if this is ok.
just my thoughts,
theo
From jjensen@welchlink.welch.jhu.eduWed Nov 29 00:32:26 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 16:25:15 -0500 (EST)
From: Joan Jensen
To: talisman@indiana.edu, theo cope
Subject: Re: baha'i-singles
Dear Theo,
Thanks so much for your story, and post to talisman. I love a happy
ending (beginning..).
Love, Joan
From 100725.315@compuserve.comWed Nov 29 00:32:51 1995
Date: 28 Nov 95 16:33:54 EST
From: sabredance <100725.315@compuserve.com>
To: talisman
Subject: re: I am trying
Linda wrote:
<>
No, it is not. The principle underlying the action is the same. On Talisman John
has the power to include or exclude. In the Bahai community the LSA and NSA has
the power to include and exclude. In this case, John is not giving particulars,
as is his full right. I can only see similarities. I am, by the way, not judging
his action. I have no opinion about it, as I do not know the particulars.
However, the similarities between the two situations are very clear to me and to
anybody who looks at it purely rationally, laying aside any emotional feeling or
thought, like right and wrong or fearing an attack on a loved one. Nobody is
attacked. People just point out the similarity. John has power here on this
list, he is God in a way here. He decides what is done here. He wrote that
himself. The effects of his decision may of yet not have that much impact on
thelives of other people as decisions of a body that is giving guidance to a
huger mass of people, and bearing much more responsibilities than John, yet it
is the same principle.
What I have seen on Talisman is that it does have an incrowd mentality. There is
a small group of people who are emotionally attached to each other and that
seems to influence their fair judgment. Also, this incrowd feels immediately
attacked, while at the same time advocating a free speech. I think that this is
not a very good approach to establish facets of truth, or to unbiased thinking.
The bad thing is that those people are showing forth exactly the same behaviour
they are protesting so much against in the Bahai community in general:
favoritism and loyalty to persons instead to independent investigation of the
truth. Also the same principle....
I am therefore glad that Talisman has grown so much, as this will induce a
diversity of opinions, and clashes, which will make truth hopefully more
available.
Sorry for the stern tone. Also apologies to Linda. I wish I had the ability to
say this in a more loving tone and skip the fault finding. The problem is, I
cannot bear injustice and blindness to ones own fault while blaming another of
it very well, you see. Yes, I am not perfect either.... :-)
Janine van Rooij
amsterdam, the netherlands
From ahmada@acsusun.acsu.unsw.edu.auWed Nov 29 00:33:22 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 09:34:15 +1100
From: Ahmad Aniss
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: reply to another mummy
Dear Talismanians,
Dear Sandy,
You wrote:
> Which leads to a few comments on Ahmad's "Seeds of Creation." His argument
> is based on a presumed dualistic nature of living organisms, with males as
> the active force and females as the receptive force. Thus, only
> the"active"males can be Manifestations or members of the Universal House of
> Justice. I hesitate to be too critical of charming and unmarried Ahmad's
> thesis, since, like Quanta, I, too, have a beautiful young daughter,
> intelligent and a deepened Baha'i, but I would like to point out a few
> inconsistencies.
I wander if you have missed some points particularly, the name of you daughter
the height, the age and other descriptions, As Quanta was at least more
accurate in her postings.
>
> I. Dualism in all three kingdoms: That dualism is a universal phenomenon is
> simply not true for many animals or vegetables, and doesn't apply at all to
> minerals.
I do not want to repeat myself on talisman so I only quote one quotation in
reply to your post, this from Abdu'l-Baha in THE PROMULGATION OF
UNIVERSAL PEACE, page 374-375.
"..... When we look upon creation, we find the
male and female principle apparent in all phenomena of existence.
In the vegetable kingdom we find the male and female fig tree, the
male and female palm, the mulberry tree and so on. All plant life is
characterized by this difference in gender, but no distinction or
preference is evidenced. Nay, rather, there is perfect equality.
Likewise, in the animal kingdom gender obtains; we have male
and female, but no distinction or preference. Perfect equality is
manifest. ......."
If Abdu'l-Baha says so I think I have to believe it.
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.auWed Nov 29 00:33:57 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 09:32:42 +1100
From: Ahmad Aniss
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Affection of Talismanian mummies
Dear Talismanians,
Dear Quanta,
Having got ready on Sunday morning to go to the Australian
temple for service, I was stoped by the buzz of the phone.
Who on earth could be on the other side of the phone I wandered,
but no one except the dearly loved, the mother in law saying hello and
how are you. After exchange of greetings and her decline of my previous
offer, I heard she said don't take every thing I say as serious, and you
still have a chance with Ayla.
Having heard all that then I departed to go to the temple with a content
heart. Let me tell you I had your family in my thoughts.
Now going to some serious staff, you wrote:
> 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.
May I correct your story and suggest that men do not possess seed of
creation in them, as seed of creation physically means a fertilised egg.
men's sperm does not qualify for this.
> Dear Sandy,
>
> I just received a strong chastisement from one of our beloved
> talismanian sisters for auctioning off my daughter to an old and
> maybe a homely man. I think she has a point, or she is jealous.
What a cheap thing to do auctioning my babe, what an ugly thought.
What is a homely man anyway let me know so to find out if I am one
or not.
having a point, or being jealous, I wander which one?
> We have no idea how this charming Ahmad looks like.
I thought I described myself, Mr. Ben, my dear, and sometimes as funny
I may be short but I am neither of the other two.
Just kidding!
> I hear horror stories of e-mail encounters.
Yes, may be truth is harsh and horrifying.
> My daughter insist
> however to see a picture of this man. We'll see what happens.
That is easy to accomplish. Just send me a pic and I do the
complement too.
> May the most smart beauty win to be the queen in the mansion,
> breezing through with the fastest car on earth.
Do I hear an Auction is building up for Ahmad?
As to the fastest car on earth, I have to disappoint those lovely daughters,
as I do complain that my old car was faster. but it does good on bends.
> Poor Ahmad becoming the "point of adornment" of talismanian mommies.
I wished the daughters of these delightful talismanian mummies were
as intelligent and as wise, if they were, they would have not spear
a minute to win the above Auction in their favour.
> Men worship beauty,
How truly said.
> women compete for it.
I wander that?
> Women love matter,
How truly said.
> men slave to get it,
I wander that?
> to have more beauty.
How truly said.
>
> *************
> But, my daughter
> wants a big heart,
labour not further as Ahamd has a galactic heart.
> not a mansion.
Where does she propose to live her life in, I wander?
Not a palace I hope.
> Fast arms,
seek no further that Ahamd has the longest ones
> not cars,
How does she propose to travel in this day and age, I wander?
A private jet perhaps.
> to reach out
> to ones in need.
Fear no further as Ahmad is in need to.
> For in life,
> you leave behind,
> that which you take,
How truly said
> and take that which you give.
> To other worlds, I mean.
How truly said.
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 dawnliqu@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduWed Nov 29 00:34:29 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 17:40:58 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: complications
1-We knock at someone's door
2-They let us in and let us know the guest rules
3-There are many people in the house invisibly. Some who may be just interested
in getting some ideas from the collective brain power. They just
sit there quietly, watch and listen, absorb etc. Others keep on
thinking, sharing, writing, etc. etc. Even some friends from Mind
Project, news groups. I mean you name it they are there from
all over the world.
4-Some do not get along; others do dandy well.
5-Some begin to threaten others privately
6-The owner throws them out
7-One of the guests feels like she is being used as a lab mouse and
suggests that we hold a committee, so that the committee
decides who the owner can throw out of his house.
8-This is the most confusing drama yet to unfold.
9-But it is an exciting place to be, for mind miners,
treasure hunters, those in pain, and those
who just talk in vain, etc. etc. I hope the house stays intact.
take care,
quanta...(*_*)
From forumbahai@es.co.nzWed Nov 29 00:35:54 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 12:40 GMT+1300
From: Alison & Steve Marshall
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Institutional power / trusting the institutions
Several years ago I overheard someone talking about her Christian
affiliations. She was describing how she'd become unsatisfied with her
church -- both pastor and congregation -- so had started attending a church
of a different denomination where she found much more spiritual fulfilment.
It struck me at the time that Baha'is are in a different situation from most
Christians, and can't "shop around" in the same way. Of course, Baha'is can
and do find their niche within the one Baha'i Faith, but it's a struggle,
and many of those niches, like Talisman, are threatened from time to time.
If there were many sects of the Baha'i religion, I think I would understand
why the sanctions our list-owner has applied could be compared with the
sanctions various Baha'i institutions have applied. People who get a hard
time in the Baha'i sect or Baha'i-related discussion group they've joined
could shop around for the one that suits them. They could even start up
their own sect or discussion group.
In case anyone's wondering, I'm not arguing here for the existence of a
sectarian Baha'i Faith. I'm arguing for more tolerance of differences in
thought and expression within the one Baha'i community, simply because we're
all in this together and have to make it work together.
Linda gets to the heart of the problem:
> There is a big difference between a single individual (with no real power)
> performing an action, and an institution with tremendous power and
> prestige doing it.
As for trusting Baha'i institutions. Yes, we should try to trust them as
much as possible -- but they also have to earn our trust. The reverse is
also true. We should be trusted as much as possible, and we have to earn the
trust of the institutions.
I work on the basis of building from existing levels of trust, rather than
keeping on putting all my trust in institutions I've felt hurt by before
(the "all or nothing" approach). Currently in my dealings with Baha'i
institutions I make sure I have things in writing, and I reserve the right
to consult with the institutions, as needed, to maintain a common
understanding. It's a "trust in God, but tie up your camel" type of trust. I
find that most of the Baha'i institutions I deal with seem to accept my
approach. The great thing about the process, when it does work, is that it
tends to build up trust and empathy on BOTH sides.
kia kaha,
(stand tall)
Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alison and Steve Marshall
Email: forumbahai@es.co.nz
90 Blacks Road, Opoho, Dunedin/Otepoti, Aotearoa/New Zealand
--------------------------------------------------------------
From margreet@margreet.seanet.comWed Nov 29 00:37:30 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 16:04:18 -0800
From: "Marguerite K. Gipson"
To: alma@indirect.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: recently emailed anti-Baha'i file
I have to object to this posting!! There was a notice on the email list of
a Covenent Breaker file going around, and that my friends is of spiritual
poison. We were warned of of the File from an ABM for Protection, and now
someone has taken it upon herself to distribute this horrible, unspiritual
poison to this list.
If we were deepened enough in the Covenent of Baha'u'llah, this should not
have happen, and not try to infect others with this poison. Just the fact
that several infact, ABM for Protection has stated this, is enough for me.
I do not care to discuss this matter, as to what is it in, and I feel for
the sake of all, that we just delete this one and move on to better
discussions. Peter Khan's talk was about those not deepened in the Faith,
who had no real attachment to the Covenent of Baha'u'llah. And he spoke
about the test of the American Believers. This is one such test. We were
told this was a file that is spiritually harmful to us for reading. Do we
disobey? We are so wrapped up in todays society as to what is harmful, that
we ignor those placed to protect us? I did not even read this file, and I
immediately deleted it off my machine. I am just shaken that someone had
the audicity to mail it out after it was declared Covenent Breaker material.
Thanks, but no thanks....
Margreet
From margreet@margreet.seanet.comWed Nov 29 00:38:12 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 16:21:07 -0800
From: "Marguerite K. Gipson"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
>
>
>Yes, I think I met Burl that summer.....
>
>At 08:45 AM 11/28/95 PST, Burl Barer wrote:
>> Margreet said: > I have known
>>>Burl since the early 70's and he just became a Bahai,
>>
>>Burl clarifies: I became a Baha'i February 1st, 1970 -- I did not just
>>become a Baha'i now -- although I am certainly still working on it.
>>
>>BB
>>
>>*******************************************************
>> Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
>>*******************************************************
>>
>>
>
>
From seena@castle.ed.ac.ukWed Nov 29 00:38:55 1995
Date: 29 Nov 95 00:31:49 GMT
From: S B Fazel
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Spilling the beans
Dear all,
I have read with interest the discussion on Hinnells' book and fully support
Juan and Tony's views. Apparently Hinnells is now less anatagonistic toward
the Faith according to a Bahai PhD student who met him last year in Aberdeen.
However, it strikes me that the beans were spilt before the aforementioned
incident and in public over a response that MacEoin received in *Religion* to
an article he wrote in 1982 in the same periodical (*The Babi Concept of Holy
War*).
The response was written by Muhammad Afnan and William Hatcher entitled
*Western Islamic Scholarship and Bahai Origins* in Religion (1985) 15:29-51,
and I quote:
*The cogency of the perspective on Bahai scholarship contained in MacEoin's
1974 article [Oriental Scholarship and the Bahai Faith, published in *World
Order*] certainly raised expectations that his future work would be of
comparable quality. Unhappily, such have not been fulfilled by his recent
publications* (p.30).
This would be quite a remarkable statement to make in a non-academic setting,
let alone in a leading academic journal. It would seem that it is not only
the British NSA that may have benefitted from wider consultation with Bahai
academics.
Seena Fazel
From SFotos@eworld.comWed Nov 29 00:44:30 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 16:32:01 -0800
From: SFotos@eworld.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: reply to mommies & Baha'i singles
Dear Talismans, especially Ahmad,
Ahmad wrote:
>>I wander if you have missed some points particularly, the name of your
daughter the height, the age and other descriptions, As Quanta was at least
more accurate in her postings.
Nice to hear from you, Ahmad, and to learn that the mommies haven't chased
you away! My daughter's name is Helen; she just graduated from Maxwell
Baha'i school, is 5'7'', slim, has light brown hair, grey green eyes and is
studying to be a teacher, majoring in science and math. I also have a son
who is 14, so she was raised with a younger brother and gets along with
guys-as-friends too.
Of course, my life as a mother won't be worth much when she learns that
these details were posted on the esteemed Talisman list, but we have to take
risks, don't we.
In defense of dualism, Ahmad cited:
"..... When we look upon creation, we find the
male and female principle apparent in all phenomena of existence.
In the vegetable kingdom we find the male and female fig tree, the
male and female palm, the mulberry tree and so on. All plant life is
characterized by this difference in gender, but no distinction or
preference is evidenced. Nay, rather, there is perfect equality.
Likewise, in the animal kingdom gender obtains; we have male
and female, but no distinction or preference. Perfect equality is
manifest. ......." Abdu'l-Baha (PUP:374-375)
This quote from The Master was referring to higher plants. And, anyway, I
don't see anything here to suggest that males are more"active" than females.
In fact, Ahmad, to help you realize this through discovery learning, I think
Quanta and I should fly our daughters to Australia and give them your
address. I can imagine you running for your life, chased by beautiful scary
daughters yelling, "We'll show you active!!!!"
Baha'i singles: What a wonderful posting by Theo on how Baha'i singles worked
out in his case. Another approach has been suggested by different postings:
if you can't find one, make one! Ladies, the call has been raised and the
motto is clear: Let's get ACTIVE!
Best,
Sandy Fotos
From gec@geoenv.comWed Nov 29 00:45:09 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 19:16:24 -0500
From: Alex Tavangar
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Covenant Breakers?
This is mainly to extend a reciprocal greeting to Dear Linda who by her own
admision is no stranger to the dramatic. My apparant dramatics display was
a spontaneous reaction to pain when someone inadvertently stepped on my toe!
The pain is gone and the bruise will no doubt heal.
Linda wrote: " Don't worry about him [Robert Stockman]. He's a big boy."
My statement was purely in relation to my own right to free association. I
agree with you that " Rob Stockman is quite capable of arguing his own
position..." I must admit however that the indignity that he had to endure
as a result of this episode would have been too much for me if I were in his
shoes. I am rather thin-skined when it comes to humiliation.
And again Linda wrote: " I think, that since you don't know all the
circumstances and the trouble that has been caused by someone's action, you
might refrain from being so judgmental."
No judgement was meant by my comments. I was simply reacting to what seemed
to me to be a fascinating irony. My appologies for causing an increase in
any fellow talismanian' adrenalin level -- unless that's a kick you enjoy.
And lastly, Linda wrote: " By the way, I haven't seen your name on Talisman
before. I wonder why you are leaping in now with your thoughts. Have you
no other opinions on anything that is being discussed here?"
And a warm greeting to you also.
Regards,
ABT ( Alex B. Tavangar)
P.S. I would like to thank John for his measured response to the cresting
and ebbing wave of emotions that was generated as a result of this
episode.
From think@ucla.eduWed Nov 29 00:45:42 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 17:04:53 -0800 (PST)
From: SAFA SADEGHPOUR
To: "Marguerite K. Gipson"
Cc: alma@indirect.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: recently emailed anti-Baha'i file
On Tue, 28 Nov 1995, Marguerite K. Gipson wrote:
> I have to object to this posting!! There was a notice on the email list of
> a Covenent Breaker file going around, and that my friends is of spiritual
> poison. We were warned of of the File from an ABM for Protection, and now
> someone has taken it upon herself to distribute this horrible, unspiritual
> poison to this list.
>
> If we were deepened enough in the Covenent of Baha'u'llah, this should not
> have happen, and not try to infect others with this poison. Just the fact
> that several infact, ABM for Protection has stated this, is enough for me.
> I do not care to discuss this matter, as to what is it in, and I feel for
> the sake of all, that we just delete this one and move on to better
> discussions. Peter Khan's talk was about those not deepened in the Faith,
> who had no real attachment to the Covenent of Baha'u'llah. And he spoke
> about the test of the American Believers. This is one such test. We were
> told this was a file that is spiritually harmful to us for reading. Do we
> disobey? We are so wrapped up in todays society as to what is harmful, that
> we ignor those placed to protect us? I did not even read this file, and I
> immediately deleted it off my machine. I am just shaken that someone had
> the audicity to mail it out after it was declared Covenent Breaker material.
>
> Thanks, but no thanks....
> Margreet
>
This is very interesting. We take great proud in having so
many beautiful principles, but we still continue to follow
the traces of the old world order.
It is under no conditions prohibited to forward or send
any message regardless of its content. Everyone has their
own right to read whatever pleases them to read. As
mentioned in a previous email the KIA speaks clearly
of the impossibility of a prohibition of books. It DOES NOT
say that this rule applies to all books except this kind
and the other kind. It is general and all encompassing.
I appreciate the person who sent the original message since
it raises many interesting questions, and does not deserve
to be treated in such an attacking fashion. I thought this
was a free forum where people shouldn't get judged
by the questions they ask.
Thanks, a lot of thanks.
Safa
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduWed Nov 29 00:47:21 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 20:08:38 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: comparing apples and oranges
Dear Janine, I have had Mr. Singh's comments and Burl's comments directed at
me. Believe me, the experience is completely different. One was actually
frightening, the other is not. I dare say that if I told Burl to pipe down and
that he was offending me, he would comply with my wishes. Mr. S. did not.
Whether someone is hunky dorry in person or not, he or she has to communicate
on e-mail in such a way as to at least give the reader a chance to understand
his or her motives. Mr. Singh never modified his tone or his words when
requested to do so. He just kept on and on. But let us bury this hatchet
please. Mr. Singh, no doubt, will find other company more suited to his
"humor."
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduWed Nov 29 00:47:44 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 18:50:12 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: complications
On Tue, 28 Nov 1995, QUANTA DAWNLIGHT wrote:
> 1-We knock at someone's door
> 2-They let us in and let us know the guest rules
...
> 5-Some begin to threaten others privately
> 6-The owner throws them out
Actually, piecing together the posts, it appears that no subscriber
violated a Talisman rule. A subscriber forwarded e-mail to somebody else,
presumably the National Assembly. All suspected of what has been
described as "tattling" were unsubscribed.
Let's resolve to all, in our own little corner of the Baha'i universe over
which we have control, trust to the power of principle and prayer.
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduWed Nov 29 00:48:51 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 19:00:48 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Talisman
Subject: A few quotes on reform
It is very unfortunate that some of the believers
do not seem to grasp the fact that the administrative
order, the Local and National Assemblies, are the
pattern for the future, however inadequate they may
sometimes seem. We must obey and support these bodies,
for this is the Baha'i law. Until we learn to do this
we cannot make real progress. Those friends who
believe that the N.S.A. is doing wrong in some matters
are, unconsciously, implying the Guardian does not know
what is going on, which is not true. He watches very
carefully over the various National Assemblies, and
never hesitates to intervene when he considers it
necessary. To undermine confidence in the National
Body disrupts the Faith, confuses and alienates the
friends, and prevents the thing the Master desired
above all else, that the Baha'is be as one spirit in
many bodies, united and loving.
The Baha'is are far from perfect, as individuals
or when they serve on elected bodies, but the system of
Baha'u'llah is perfect and gradually the believers will
mature and the system will work better. The watchful
eye of the Guardian prevents any serious errors, and
the believers should know this and co-operate with
their Assemblies fully.
(From a letter dated 1 November 1950 written on behalf of Shoghi
Effendi to an individual believer; from the Compilation on the
National Spiritual Assembly, Compilation of Compilations, Vol.
II, p. 135, #1520.)
This watchfulness is now carried out by the Universal House of
Justice:
"Among the powers and duties with which the Universal
House of Justice has been invested are: ... To be
responsible for ensuring that no body or institution
within the Cause abuse its privileges or decline in the
exercise of its rights and prerogatives ..."
(The Constitution of the Universal House of Justice, p. 5)
The Guardian wrote that the National Spiritual Assembly itself
must be the decision-maker in matters in which it is involved,
and there are no exceptions to this principle:
Anything whatsoever affecting the interests of the
Cause and in which the National Assembly as a body is
involved should, if regarded as unsatisfactory by Local
Assemblies or individual believers, be immediately
referred to the National Assembly itself. Neither the
general body of the believers, nor any Local Assembly,
nor even the delegates to the Annual Convention should
be regarded as having any authority to entertain
appeals against the decision of the National Assembly.
Should the matter be referred to the Guardian it will
be his duty to consider it with the utmost care and to
decide whether the issues involved justify him to
consider it in person, or to leave it entirely to the
discretion of the National Assembly.
This administrative principle which the Guardian
is now restating and emphasizing is so clear, so
comprehensive and simple that no misunderstanding as to
its application, he feels, can possibly arise. There
are no exceptions whatever to this rule, and the
Guardian would deprecate any attempt to elaborate or
dwell any further upon this fundamental and clearly-
enunciated principle. The problems with which the
Faith is now grappling, whether national or
international, are so pressing and momentous that no
one among its loyal adherents can afford to dissipate
his precious energies on details arising from the
application of administrative principles, or even on
the perfecting of the machinery of the administration
itself. Purely secondary matters can be postponed
until the primary tasks are performed.
(From a letter dated 10 September 1934 written on behalf of
Shoghi Effendi to the National Spiritual Assembly of the United
States and Canada; from the Compilation on the National Spiritual
Assembly, Compilation of Compilations, Vol. II, pp. 129-130
#1506.)
I understand this to mean that whatever our past experiences, whatever
scar tissue is on our hearts, we need to approach the door again, with
pure hearts held in hand, and trust to Divine wisdom.
Love,
Brent
From richs@microsoft.comWed Nov 29 00:49:24 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 17:41:30 -0800
From: richs@microsoft.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu, alma@indirect.com
Subject: RE: recently emailed anti-Baha'i file
Dear Alma and Talizens,
From: alma@indirect.com[SMTP:alma@indirect.com]
>Now I have some questions for all ye learneds and not so learneds here.
I'll try to answer your questions, but you should understand that
these answers come from Rick Schaut and not from any institution
of the Faith. There is some specific guidance available from the
Universal House of Justice. If I don't see copies in the next day or
so, I'll see if I can't find them.
>1. Just what makes something 'covenant breaker material' as opposed to
>plain vanila anti-Baha'i material?
Any material which advances a claim made by a covenant breaker is
covenant breaker material. (Well, not just _any_ claim, but a claim
which runs counter to some provision of the Covenant.) For example,
any material which argues that some individual should be regarded as
the Guardian of the Faith would be covenant breaker material.
>2. Just what makes someone a covenant breaker rather than simply someone
>with an anti Baha'i point of view unless the Universal House of Justice has
>declared that person has that status?
The short answer to this question is "nothing." The House doesn't make
the actual declaration (small technical matter), but any declaration is
subject to the approval of the House.
>3. What right does any Baha'i have to try to impose restrictions on other
>Baha'is such as occur in the first email?
I actually think there's a bit of miscommunication going on here. It's
generally understood that reading covenant breaker material is very
strongly discouraged. It is not, however, banned. There are some
enemies of the Faith who will claim that some books have been
banned, but this isn't true. (Indeed, some Baha'is have to read
covenant breaker material in the course of carrying out their duties
as members of one of the institutions, both elected and appointed.)
When people, such as a member of the Auxiliary Board or a member
of the National Spiritual Assembly, say that we should not read
something because it's covenant breaker material, they are merely
reiterating this rather strong message of discouragement. It's a
case of "proceed at your own risk."
We should be mindful that association with covenant breakers has
been strictly prohibited by `Abdu'l-Baha. In unequivocal words, He
has told us to shun them. This is, however, not the same thing as
reading their material.
Warmest Regards,
Rick Schaut
From richs@microsoft.comWed Nov 29 00:50:14 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 18:32:46 -0800
From: richs@microsoft.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu, gpoirier@acca.nmsu.edu
Subject: RE: A few quotes on reform
Dear Brent and Talizens,
Thank you for the quotes. I have but one point to add:
From: [G. Brent Poirier][SMTP:gpoirier@acca.nmsu.edu]
>(From a letter dated 1 November 1950 written on behalf of Shoghi
>Effendi to an individual believer; from the Compilation on the
>National Spiritual Assembly, Compilation of Compilations, Vol.
>II, p. 135, #1520.)
The above-mentioned letter is also quoted in the February, 1993
memorandum, _Issues Concerning Community Functioning_, written
by the Research Department of the Universal House of Justice.
If any of the friends might be inclined to believe that the ideas
written 45 years ago are no longer valid, we can consider those
ideas as having been reiterated less than three years ago.
Warmest Regards,
Rick Schaut
From richs@microsoft.comWed Nov 29 00:50:25 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 18:47:13 -0800
From: richs@microsoft.com
To: think@ucla.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Re: recently emailed anti-Baha'i file
Dear Safa and Friends,
From: SAFA SADEGHPOUR[SMTP:think@ucla.edu]
>It is under no conditions prohibited to forward or send
>any message regardless of its content. Everyone has their
>own right to read whatever pleases them to read.
I think we need to identify two principles, here. First,
sending and forwarding items to an e-mail list is rather
like a broadcasting. There are those who are very sincerely
trying to adhere to the guidance about covenant breaker
material, and, when we are broadcasting messages, we
should take their rights into account.
This can be accomplished by saying "I have such-and-such
material and will provide copies to anyone who requests."
This allows us to satisfy the second principle: that people
be allowed to read whatever they chose to read.
One has no more right to inflict this material on others
as others have to prevent one from reading the material
if one chooses.
Warmest Regards,
Rick Schaut
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzWed Nov 29 00:51:29 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 17:52:01 +1300
From: Robert Johnston
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Institutional power / trusting the institutions
Dear Steve (Marshall),
Re:
>
>If there were many sects of the Baha'i religion, I think I would understand
>why the sanctions our list-owner has applied could be compared with the
>sanctions various Baha'i institutions have applied. People who get a hard
>time in the Baha'i sect or Baha'i-related discussion group they've joined
>could shop around for the one that suits them. They could even start up
>their own sect or discussion group.
This is the old "love it or leave it" type argument, methinks, and -- as
such -- is rather too simplistic. A list exists essentially through the
efforts of contributors who sacrifice to maintain it. A significant number
major contributors have been distressed by the summary dismissal of a
handful of subscribers for -- as Brent has pointed out -- no obviously
legitimate reason. In these kinds of circumstances it is rather too easy
to turn inwards and adopt a stubborn boer trekker attitude, and to more or
less say b.....-off. However, I think that it would be wise to listen very
carefully and respectfully to these voices which, as I have already
indicated, are raised in a spirit of sacrifice and service. How can we
really estimate the price of the creation of estangement, in the presence
of good-will? What will become of a boss who sacks and/or abuses his best
workers?
I wish you had something more useful to contribute, Steve, than these
infrequent letters in which a censorial introversion is veiled by
wishy-washy and confused arguments. Of course, you may get the sect of
your wish.... you will be pleased to learn that I will not be a part of it,
though.
Regarding your comments on our relationship with institutions. Sure, we
should become very mature in our relationship, but I am not happy at the
obedience quotient of your prescription.
bluntly,
Robert.
From TLCULHANE@aol.comWed Nov 29 00:52:52 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:34:56 -0500
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Wilmette , Berlin and America
Dear Friends ,
I continue to be amazed by the discussion .
The actions of an individual and an institution are not perfectly
symetrical .
We hace the " List Owner" acting ina capacity as a private individual .
I want to emphasize the "owner " part of this designation . Talisman is a
private undertaking supported by public funds i.e. the State of Indiana .
It is an example of civil socierty . The actions of Wilmette in the context
of the Baha i commujnity are the actions of a State ; and as the May 19th
letter points out the admin. institutions of the Faith do not "own " it .
Membership on a private list such as Talisman are voluntary . Losing
ones "right " to participate on Talisman is not analagous to losing ones
"right " to participate in the Baha i Community . If I offend a private party
in an undertaking of that private party I can be asked to leave the "party "
. This does not preclude me from attending other parties . Nor does it
preclude me from organizing a "party" more to me own liking .
If I lose my right to participate in the Bahai "party" I do not have
the option of attending a party of the same type elsewhere nor do I have the
option of creating a different party more to my own liking . The latter
option is known as covenant breaking . For this reason , the "coercive "
power of the LSA/ NSA is or ought to be subject to more strict criterion as
to who is and under what circumstances they may be removed from the party .
The issues here differ not only in degree but of kind .
The continued confusion between the two sets of actions continues to
surprise me. Goodness , the Guardian understood perfectly well the
distinction between the actions of individuals and those of institutions and
cautioned the friends not to confuse the two .
This kind of confusion, in this context, is a type of pre-democratic
thinking and is quite similar to notions of the divine right of kings i.e.
the actions of the king as sovereign are not subject to the approval or
"legitimacy " of the people . The early liberal property rights arguments
were meant to counter just this sort of action . The list owner is acting
under that type of right ; that is classic liberal property rights not
subject to the coercive interference of the "sovereign". Getting to the
issue of human rights is another situation .
Now one may choose to hold other notions of "sovereignty" , state like
powers , the mandate to rule and so forth in a democratic republic. Those
notions will be tolerated in a democratic republic . When that toleration
ceases in a democratic republic is when the alternate epistemologies and
their ethical implications seek to undermine the "order" in which such
toleration is excercised. It is not the various alternative epistemologies
expressed on Talisman which concern me - I can always hit the delete button .
What does concern me as I have been influenced by the American pragmatists,
are the ethical implications of those epistemologies . I would ask everyone
to think thru the implications of what is advocated as the" Bahai" way . We
may take our rightousness for granted but that does not mean the rest of the
world does . What the "world " hears more often than not are various claims
to absolutism , religious exclusivity and intolerance all masked with the
rhetoric of unity ,and oneness . So please if we really want to offer the
world something we ought to take more seriously intellectual history and the
origins and implications of the thoughts expressed for the world we are
living in . I would not be willing to live in a pre- demodcratic world .
Nor I might add is that how I understand the Faith of Baha u llah nor is it
the Faith that I teach to others .
To Stephen : My rousing defense of America will have to wait until I
return from a two day business trip . The general outline will go something
like this as a thought experiment . Suppose there was a member of a religious
community who decided to live in a socio cultural setting that was not
native to him or her . Suppose further that this missionary informed the
natives that their legal , political ,religious , cultural life in general
was gravely deficient . Suppose further that our missionary informed the
natives of that land that our hero had something that was perfect in every
way and that true bliss and salvation awaited the natives if only they would
reject their gravely deficient ways , legal ,political , religious , and
cultural and all of its attendent history . Suppose further that the natives
did not rush to embrace the "truth " of this perfect way brought to them by
our missionary from abroad . In fact they , being reasonably tolerant beings
in the face of such affronts to their honor and identity , just ignored both
our hero and his / her message . So now what ?
warm regards ,
Terry
From burlb@bmi.netWed Nov 29 01:26:53 1995
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 23:36 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Lesley Gore & Bad Grammer
"its my party and I'll cry if I want to"
Hosting the party, according to the effervescent and reverberized vocalist,
Leslie Gore, entitles one to certain perogatives -- crying being perhaps
less important than access to the remaining clam dip when the guests are
gone. Talisman is John's party, with Linda dutifully standing in the
vestibule greeting folks with a warm bowl of beans 'n' franks in one hand,
and several of those little toothpicks with frizzy colored plastic shreds on
them in the other. She also has catnip laced with Thorazine should Sherman
saunter in.
If some man or woman arrives brandishing a weapon, making threats against
the folks conviviating over the guacamole, John would assuredly either (a)
insist that the leave at once, or (b) ask Linda the Catholic Shi'ite Ninja
to make sure they leave at once.
If the next day several of the guests who missed the rukus asked why someone
was ejected, John may wish to spare the ejected one the humiliation of
having his/her sins recounted, thus demonstrating exemplary courtesy and
discretion.
Now: Who can tell me what the complaint was/is about the Bab and
Baha'u'llah's grammer? I recall reading something about this topic somewhere
once...was it in World Order or some ABS book?...anyway, please help me on
this as this is being brought up (again) as a "disproof" of their Truth.
Thanks,
Burl (pass the clam dip) Barer
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From dann.may@sandbox.telepath.comWed Nov 29 01:27:19 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 09:22:26 -0600 (CST)
From: dann.may@sandbox.telepath.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Nirvana=ult. concern?
Whether or not Buddhism, or to use W.C. Smith's designation, whether the
Buddhisms, have a concept of ultimate reality /concern, God, Godhead, etc.,
partly depends on your definition of these terms.
Nirvana (lit. "cool by blowing") is first a state of being where a person
becomes free from desires and defilements [i.e from the "the three
intoxicants" or "three unwholesome roots: (1) Greed or lust (lobha); 2.
Hatred (dosa); 3. Illusion or ignorance (moha or Sanskrit avidya; Pali
avijja)]. It is the spiritual goal of Buddhism; the extinction of all that
is base, corrupt, and vicious in human nature. From one point of view,
Nirvana could be considered "God", in the sense of the Godhead, as
discussed by the religious scholar Huston Smith and as ultimate reality, as
elaborated by the Christian theologian Paul Tillich.
Huston Smith poses the question as to whether Nirvana is God?
The question, "Is Nirvana God?" has no simple answer because the
word God has no single meaning. Two meanings at least must be distinguished
before any sort of satisfactory answer can be even hoped for.
One accepted meaning of God is that of a personal being who created
the universe by a deliberate act of will [i.e. the Hindu concept of Saguna
Brahman]. If defined in this sense, Nirvana is not God. Buddha did not
consider it personal because personality requires definition which is
precisely what Nirvana excludes. . . . If indifference to a personal
creator is atheism, Buddha was indeed an atheist.
There is, however, a second meaning of God which to distinguish it
from the first we may call the Godhead. The idea of personality is not part
of this concept which is strong in the mystical traditions of a number of
religions including Christianity [i.e. the Hindu concept of Nirguna
Brahman]. When the Buddha comes forward with his decisive declaration,
"There is, O monks, an unborn, neither become nor created nor formed. . . .
Were there not there would be no deliverance from the born, the made, the
compounded (Iti-vuttaka, 43; Udana 8:3)" he seems to be speaking precisely
in this tradition. Impressed by the similarities between Nirvana and the
Godhead, Edward Conze has compiled from Buddhist texts a series of
attributes that apply to both. We are told
"that Nirvana is permanent, stable, imperishable, immovable,
ageless, deathless, unborn, and unbecome, that it is power, bliss, and
happiness, the secure refuge, the shelter, and the place of unassailable
safety; that it is the real Truth and the supreme Reality; that it is the
Good, the supreme goal and the one and the only consummation of our life,
the eternal, hidden and incomprehensible Peace (_Buddhism: Its Essence and
Development_, 40)."
We may conclude with Conze that nirvana is not god defined as
personal creator, but that it stands sufficiently close to the concept of
God as godhead to warrant the name in that sense. (Huston Smith, _The
World's Religions_ 115)
Paul Tillich writes
If God is understood as that which concerns man ultimately, early
Buddhism has a concept of God just as certainly as does Vedanta Hinduism.
(Paul Tillich, _Systematic Theology_, Vol. 1, 220)
Warmest greetings, Dann May, Philosophy, OK City Univ.
---
* WR 1.32 # 669 * The path to holiness lies in questioning everything.-Peck
From dann.may@sandbox.telepath.comWed Nov 29 01:28:51 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 10:07:28 -0600 (CST)
From: dann.may@sandbox.telepath.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: KNOWING THE SELF/ ZEN &
Dear Juan,
As lover of Zen, I found your recent posting on Baha'i-Zen parallels
on satori /enlightenment quite fascinating. Please keep posting your
thoughts.
Also, A while back you posted some material on "standpoint epistemology"
and mentioned that Lambden and Momen delinated 5 metaphysical planes. Could
you please tell me where I might obtain their essay on this fascinating
topic? Or, if you have anything on this, could you send me the material?
Warmest greetings, Dann May, Philosophy, OK City Univ.
---
* WR 1.32 # 669 * Education is the fundamental method of social progress.
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduWed Nov 29 01:29:05 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:22:55 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Talisman
Subject: Wilmette ain't Berlin
On Mon, 27 Nov 1995 the List Owner wrote:
> 2) The list is a benevolent autocracy. You are here as my guests, but >
when there are judgement calls to be made, I make them.
First, I want to throw oil on the water, not on the fire. I do not want
to excite emotions, I do not want to make John or anybody else
defensive. I especially do not want to go into the specifics of John's
terminating the subscriptions of the people in Wilmette. I want to point
out a principle. This quote from John will be useful:
> 3) I will intervene only under two conditions: > a) Someone is behaving
> sufficiently obnoxiously to imperil the > functioning of the list.
> b) *Someone is threatening someone else.*
My original point was that the statement in asterisks is arguably not
clearly enunciated in the following List Rule which refers to "decorum."
> 4. Participants are reminded that
they are on the list as guests of the list
> owner. Violations of decorum will be punished by
being dropped from the
> list. This sanction is solely at the
discretion of the list owner and
is not subject to appeal.
Therefore, applying the legalistic logic of a list of sanctionable
offenses to one's participation on Talisman, would be a constraint on the
list owner. The authority of the list owner is explicit in a number
of phrases:
> John Walbridge
> List Owner
> The list is open to anyone
> approved by the list owner.
As well as the above quote about our participation being at the List
Owner's discretion, and that expulsions are not subject to appeal;
there's nobody higher. Now, I ask you to consider, what if when you
declared your faith, the NSA sent out your membership card with a letter
spelling out the Baha'i laws and welcoming you to the Baha'i community,
and included language like that? Some of the friends would be all over
the NSA for being authoritarian. While John has not, to my knowledge,
compared the NSA to the Nazi regime, others have, which I find repugnant.
I compare it, rather, to John's authority as List Owner. He has
obligations emanating from several sources: His ethics, his
professorship, his trusteeship of the assets of the taxpayers of Indiana.
Please listen closely: In no way do I intend to convey approval of John's
action towards the list members in Wilmette. I am comparing his
authority, and that you have to *qualify* to have such authority placed
into your hands. That's precisely why we join in the game: We concur in
John's competence to fairly exercise that authority to everyone's benefit.
Likewise, the NSA has obligations, to its principles, to the House, and as
steward of not only the funds of the faith, but to protect the health and
well-being of the faith of the believers.
John also wrote:
> I don't particularly want to explain the details of this situation,
for reasons
> that will be clear enough if I end up having to do so.
This is quite appropriate, and I for one do understand that sometimes
people in authority deem it wise to not spread information all over the
worldwide internet. I ask that the motives of the NSA in not divulging
sources, and not explaining all of the details of its actions, not
instantaneously be compared to Hitler. That is not only unfair: Such
comments are poisonous. They erode the trust in the institutions that is
a highly prized part of my commitment to Baha'u'llah, and I think, an
element in Baha'i life. I've been around for 25 years, I've read enough
and had enough contact with the NSA as an institution and with its members
individually, to trust them. But others have not had that benefit. I
have had communications with a fairly new believer, bright, of pristine
character, and deeply committed to Baha'u'llah, who looks up to the
academic professionals and understands the value in a religion of people
with those credentials. And this person has swallowed the view that the
NSA is to be distrusted, that comparisons of the Administrative Order
built by the Guardian to Nazi Germany are acceptable and accurate, that
the NSA runs roughshod over innocent people who merely express innocent
views, and I feel that the harm done is due to distortions on this list.
The NSA has the right and obligation to protect the support of the
believers for the NSA.
I won't personalize this to John; he has wisely not risen to any bait, nor
lashed out at others, and I do not wish to give him cause to do so, nor to
have him become defensive. So I have referred to the "List Owner,"
because it is in his capacity as an administrator that I wish to draw
these analogies.
Please note the language that there is no right of appeal from a
deprivation of Talisman rights; there is the right of reconsideration by
the List Owner. I am not suggesting that in order to be consistent, the
List Owner needs to set up a committee of review and go through exhaustive
evaluations before unsubscribing somebody. But I am asking that we defer
to the authority of the NSA, to its "unchallengeable" authority, as the
Guardian describes it, and that we try to come to comfortable terms with
the scope of its authority.
Linda wrote:
> John hasn't thrown anyone off of Talisman for having
differing viewpoints. We
have plenty of sparks going on here. No one gets kicked
off because he doesn't see life the way the Listowner does.
and Juan wrote:
Threatening a member of Talisman because of his posting is
the equivalent of a crime. It is like reading an article
you disagree with, and, instead of replying with better
arguments and documentation, deciding to go over to his
house and break his legs with baseball bats.
I would like to state that likewise, I do not accept the oft-expressed
view I've seen over the past year on this list, that people have been
deprived of their administrative rights because of "having differing
viewpoints" or because they said something the NSA disagreed with on
something so innocuous as a different view of "history." This cheapens
and distorts the protective aspect of the NSA. I am saying that just as
John has the legitimate authority to protect the list, the NSA has the
legitimate authority to keep limpid the stream of love and support for it.
This precise admonition was expressed by the House of Justice in the May
1994 letter to the US NSA. Following its diagnosis of several problems at
the top of the US Administration, the House said for the friends to
increase our trust for the NSA. In the world at large, we would not find
such a juxtaposition: Just criticism of a body, then a call for support
of that body. I think it's because the Faith operates according to
principles that are at variance with the world's institutions. The House
calls on us to trust to those principles to rectify all inequities.
Let's give them a chance.
I agree that there have been inequities. I disagree with the rhetoric
that accompanies the airing of them. I disagree with the view that the
structure of the NSA should be changed to prevent them. I disagree that
there are many of them, that the NSA doesn't care. I disagree that
anybody on this list has any greater sense of justice than the House of
Justice (e.g. in the admonition of the House that a member of an assembly
who has a personal interest in the outcome of a matter under consideration
by the assembly, should participate in the decision.)
Finally, to Juan's post:
The cries of outrage over John's reconsideration of
subscription rights of persons who work for the
issuer of the threat would be much muted among
civilized persons if the full facts were known.
Yet, when the NSA refuses to bring the facts of a case into the "light of
day" it is compared to the Star Chamber. Don't you think the NSA would
like nothing better than to defend itself against the attacks on it made
on Talisman? The List Owner is right to keep the matter private.
Likewise, the fact that the NSA handles administrative matters in private,
does not countenance comparisons to Berlin.
I have been asked, if I lived in Nazi Germany would I have been a Raul
Wallenberg or a dutiful Jew-burner. I realize full well that the question
is asked, not to be offensive, but because my views fairly mystify my
friends, who don't understand how I can appear before tribunals all day
which operate under principles developed and refined through centuries of
human experience, but do not uphold application of some of those same
principles to the actions of the NSA.
I am hurt and outraged that any of you have compared any National Assembly
to Nazi Germany. Do not comfort yourselves with the patronizing thought,
"well, if Brent's faith isn't strong enough..." It's not that I can't
handle knowing the truth about the NSA's conduct. It is that if you know,
or think you know, that the NSA has acted improperly, there is a method of
handling such information. Please act within that system. The House has
counseled us against taking things into our own hands which do not belong
there. We have neither the wisdom nor the authority to handle them. If
you go outside of the teachings on how to handle such accusations, you
can do great harm to the Faith you love; and where will you be then?
The vibes of the postings which make such accusations are horrible. If
the accusations are true, put your faith on the line. Gather your courage
and hand it over to the House. I do not stand with you if you air such
sentiments, and harbor such suspicions, against the NSA. If you express
them under the rubric of "free speech" and dress them in the garb of
"academic research," you will understand that I will see such a view as
short-sighted. If you have such information, you have a duty to yourself
and to me and all of us, to hand it over. If your views are not supported
by the House, then please have the flexibility and open mindedness to
consider whether your suspicions were wrong.
From dan_orey@qmbridge.ccs.csus.eduWed Nov 29 10:35:02 1995
Date: 28 Nov 95 22:07:54 U
From: Dan Orey
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: SBirkland@aol.com
Subject: A gay Baha'i Responds
Reply to: A gay Baha'i Responds
Dear Talisman Citizens -
The following represents my own opinion, and reflects the personal feelings of
loss I have after receiving the recent letter from the World Centre. I want to
state that I plan on following the UHJ's guidance to the best of my ability,
and would do nothing to knowingly cause pain or hurt to any Baha'i or Baha'i
Institution.
As many here on Talisman have noted, the NSA of the United States has received
a letter re: homosexuality (dated September 11, 1995) which has been published
inthe recent American Baha'i. As a gay male, I am mystified, indeed devastated.
Not because in my heart of hearts, I had wished that the Supreme Institution
would see a new way to begin a process towards fully accepting many of us into
the Faith, but, because it doesn't demonstrate to me a full or enlightened
understanding of the issue. Indeed it categorically rejects current scientific,
academic, scholarly, and social research in the field. It appears to me that
the UHJ consulted people who know little or nothing of current gay & lesbian or
"queer" studies. As a Baha'i I am ashamed, and as a gay male I am insulted.
The continued use of stereotypic descriptions of homosexuals in conjunction
with such terms as "handicap, lechery, drugs, pederasty, adultery, sodomy" is
both repugnant and bothersome to the vast majority of loving, tolerant, and
thinking people in my city and university. How can I ever have hope that these
wonderful people that I happily call friends, family, neighbors, and colleagues
ever join this Religion?
The September letter, offers no sense of understanding as to what it is like to
be a homosexual and a Baha'i in the late 20th Century. I have tried to explain,
and will continue to do so in the future, that the Writings do not describe my
reality, nor that of the majority of my friends and their families. A number of
Baha'i youth have committed suicide because of this form of teaching, this
letter does not address this travesty. Numerous Baha'is have passed away due to
complications due to the HIV virus, only to have their terrible deaths covered
up by thin excuses such as "cancer", or "automobile accidents". It does nothing
to support the memory of these friends or tell their families that their shame
is unwarranted. World over, many people have died alone and lonely, abandoned
both by family and community, this letter does nothing to address the growing
AIDS pandemic. I do not believe, that this is what Baha'u'llah had in mind by
"moral conduct".
However I do believe that the kind of "homosexuality" - if you can call it that
- existed in the Middle East during the last century has anything to do with my
experience as a gay man in late 20th Century North America (or South America
when I am there). I also believe that the historical context in which the
Guardian spoke about the subject was so terrible and repressed that His words
rang out as extremely loving and tolerant in that time. I also firmly believe
he would be more enlightened in his response to the 1990's reality. As was
stated over three years ago in a letter to the NSA (which was never answered),
"In recent decades homosexuality has emerged from centuries of unspeakable
repression blossoming almost overnight into a worldwide movement of liberation
and civil rights. During the Inquisition, homosexuals were tortured and killed
as satanic heretics. Lesbians have been reviled, hated, and burned as witches.
Countless thousands of gay men and lesbians were herded into railroad cars by
the Nazis never to be seen again. Not long ago, people were "committed" to
asylums by their families for electric shock treatments and strapped to tables
for lobotomies simply because their desires did not conform to the majority. Is
it any wonder that people so terribly oppressed would be receptive to the
healing message of Baha'u'llah? Can it be that the same pervasive winds of
change affecting the entire world, opening peoples eyes to oppression, hoisting
the banner of justice, eliminating prejudices of all kinds, can it be that this
liberating wind has blown in an unanticipated direction? It seems exactly that
way from our perspective. It is obvious that a new world order is being created
before our very eyes. We simply ask to be allowed to be a part of the work of
building it."
For those of us who work in higher education, it comes as an absolute absurdity
that I can be accepted as a gay person, I can be out, indeed my human rights
are protected by my University, the City of Sacramento, and as an employee of
the State of California. Yet as a Baha'i, I am considered "handicapped",
"immoral", and "disgusting", and worthy of sanction. I am both proud and
relieved that this is considered illegal behavior in both my City and State.
I am as proud of my gay heritage as I am of my Baha'i one. Asking a homosexual
to forget about their sexual orientation is like asking a black person to try
to be white - it just won't work (nor would they want to). I would never change
this test, nor do I wish to exchange my belief and love for the Baha'u'llah for
anything in the world. I believe that I can be both gay and Baha'i, and I
continue to live with the "dream" that millions of other homosexuals in the
world can as well.
Obviously there is nothing that can be done now. I shudder to think what would
happen should such a letter reach the mainstream, let alone the gay press. I
hope that I will be able to continue to serve as a channel for understanding,
as a bridge for healing of this issue. As directed in a personal letter to
myself from the UHJ, I was told to work with Continental Counselor Stephen
Birkland, this letter serves as such a confirmation, and willingness to to
follow his directives.
I pray that each and every one of us can reach out and embrace those gay &
lesbian friends that we know, and tell them that they are loved and welcomed.
At least that has not been banned.
- Daniel (proud to be the unofficial mayor of the gay Ghetto in Talisman City)
Orey, Baha'i ID Number: 0084297
From jrcole@umich.eduWed Nov 29 10:37:50 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 01:26:41 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: Burl Barer
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The Bab's Grammar
Burl:
With regard to the Bab's grammar, this is a very complex subject. First
of all, we need to step back from the idea that there is some sort of
essentialized "correct grammar." Sandy Fotos perhaps can help us here.
Languages are internally very diverse; any group of persons in frequent
contact with one another and less frequent contact with outsiders
develops a distinctive use of the language, and this can with time and
relative isolation become a dialect and then even a different language
(as with Spanish and Portuguese or Hindi and Gujarati).
It is true that the disciplinary institutions of society--state,
commerce, religion--often choose out a particular dialect and attempt to
make it the standard. Often cities have an urban standard different from
the countryside. Parisian French was spoken by very few people in what
is now France in 1400; indeed, any sort of French was a minority affair.
By 1789 the Bourbons had succeeded in getting about half the population
to speak some dialect of French, but only 12% spoke Parisian. And there
were large numbers of dialects, as well as separate languages (Breton,
Basque, Flemish, etc.). Only under the Third Republic, with extensive
national schooling (and disciplining) of peasants, did Parisian French
begin to be decisively imposed on the country; in the 20th century media
such as film, radio and television reinforced this process. But the
point is that making Parisian French the standard was a political choice
of the Bourbons; it is not inherently superior to other dialects or
languages.
The Muslim clergy and Arab intellectuals attempted to create a
standardized Arabic (much different, to this day, from what anyone
actually spoke), based on pre-Islamic poetry and the Qur'an. This
language was used by clerics, bureaucrats, and merchants in the Muslim
Middle East. Many of its grammatical rules are based on the Qur'an, but
even the Qur'an contains grammatical inconsistencies according to these
rules!
In actual usage, this grammar was seldom perfectly adhered to. The great
Egyptian historian of the 18th century, al-Jabarti, wrote a chronicle
full of grammatical "errors" that reflected Egyptian speech. I have seen
archival documents that likewise are grammatically "wrong", but which
reflect the written Arabic of Egyptian bureaucrats of the time. These
people were negotiating between colloquial, spoken Arabic and the
standardized classical Arabic of the clergy.
The situation is even more complex in Iran, where Persian, an
Indo-European language, had an impact on the way many Iranians wrote
Arabic (a Semitic language).
In Iran, much Arabic was taken into Persian, but was grammatically
transformed. Thus, in Arabic one would say al-hubb al-ilahi for [the]
divine [the] love. The "al-" is like "the" and has to be repeated in the
adjective. But Persian lacks a definite article (as most American
Baha'is will have noticed). You would say hubb-i ilahi for divine love.
But where Iranians brought an Arabic phrase into Persian they would write
hubb al-ilahi. From an Arabic point of view this is a mistake, since it
omits the first definite article. But that is good standard
Perso-Arabic. The Bab does this sort of thing in his purely Arabic
writings, eliciting objections from those who used standard classical Arabic.
Some of the grammatical "errors" in the Bab's writings derive from this
Perso-Arabic milieu and might be seen as a form of "interference." Some
derive from the fact that he was a merchant, not a cleric, and, like the
Cairo bureaucrats, there were elements of grammar he did not think
important. Some of the "errors" appear to derive from his practice of
"automatic writing" (like that of Yeats) in which his subconscious became
the vehicle for revelation. Some come from a deliberate attempt to
disrupt ordinary reality, which I have compared to Dadaism (the Bab
speaks of the letters "rebelling"). Note that grammar is a largely
left-brain activity, and the Bab was clearly a mainly right-brain author.
The point is, however, that the Bab created a one-man dialect. And if
one wished to make it the basis for a new standardized Arabic, one
could. Grammatically, it would probably be simpler. Language is arbitrary.
Finally, I would like to point out to Christian critics of the Bab's
Arabic (!) that the Greek of the New Testament leaves a lot to be desired
by the standards of classical Greek.
cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
From Alethinos@aol.comWed Nov 29 10:40:08 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 01:45:26 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: It's 3 O'Clock in the morning and their screaming in Bakersfield, CA.
First thank you Terry, thank God I am always certain what it is you're
trying to say.
I guess what I am saying, and please Terry pay close attention here - the
subtelty make get squeaky tight - is that Talisman is a wonderful sandbox
where a number of people can whine and complain and set the tone that
essentially dominates the list. Doubt me? Read over the past six months and
see how many posts have dealt with complaints about the inistitutions, about
*threats* to academic freedeom, about removal of rights, *heavy-handedness*
etc, etc, etc.
When it was repeatedly pointed out that there was a whole lot of
complaining going on and that nothing constructive was rarely if ever
offered; that such whining and crying was leading nowhere the tone changed so
as to legitimize continued complaint. *Reforms* became the big topic. But the
goal was the same. To focus as much blame and attention on the *enemy*. The
poster plastering of martyrs to the cause of academic as well as individual
freedoms greeted our eyes nearly each day when pulling down the list.
You echoed Juan's supposedly exasperated plea "what next?!". You can't
possibly be that naive. Or has the desire to simply seek a narrow agenda so
darkened your sight that you can only see the course that has so superimposed
itself on this list for so long?
WHAT NEXT?!
For God sake what should be done? Continue to bitch and moan and complain
and lambast and accuse and impute?? Shall we continue to see a list that
could be used as a powerful tool to actually affect change - real change -
that could be used to plan and connect and inspire - shall we continue to
see it used for the express purpose of a few who feel the overwhelming need
to never let go of whatever wrongs have been done them, to continuously seek
to punish and in so doing spread anger, distrust, and dispair?
In the semi-immortal words of my favorite ex-Eagle GET OVER IT!
Is there desire to see real change here - from these very people who now
tout reform? What is the use in pushing for reform when they know, we all
know that the Faith in America is essentially dead in the water and has been
for a long time? Reforms for Who? For What? No one reading this list and
knowing these conditions can possibly believe for one moment that these
suggestions for reforms will have any attractive capacity at all? What, so
Americans will come rushing to a Faith that more closely resembles the Church
of the ACLU?
The problems of immaturity can and will be dealt with - when we actually
have a serious pressing need to deal with them. No one doubts for a moment
that there has not been and still is problems. Do you really think that such
pathetic crying will somehow shake the leathergy and apathy on the one hand,
or the incredible naivete and *got-their -head-in-a-cloud* blindness on the
other from the vast majority of the Baha'is in this country? Your depth of
understanding of the problems facing this country cannot possibly be that
shallow!
So tell me, in clear language, anyone. How do you see the recent pattern
of discourse here on this list affecting the hearts and minds of the
believers? How is this to inspire them to arise? In rebellion perhaps?
Perhaps they will boycott their LSAs because they feel _they_ have been
treated unfairly? They could convince a significant number of their fellow
community members to turn a deaf ear to the patriarchal, power-hungry
near-fascist regimes that have erred so greviously?
Really - let me ask you NOW WHAT? What wonderful spirit-cleansing
solutions have been offered here to lead this nation toward its destiny?
Where has been the continuous discourse that would lead toward a building of
a solid unity of thought concerning the Guardian's vision for America and the
role it must play in unfolding the Cause of God across the globe? Where is
the frank discussion of the problems and mistakes that have been made -
tempered with the compassion born of a realization that we are ALL human,
that NO ONE has a complete picture of the Warp and Woof of this Cause - a
discussion that will lead us quickly into action that can counter those
errors and impel us forward? Where is the healing hands that can AT ONCE tear
away the veils of ignorance before the eyes of the multitude of the believers
and offer a light out of the darkness?
WHAT NOW?! What now . . . How about now we set aside all this childish
adolescent temper tantrums and pouting and actually get to work? Or would it
be better for all concerned to continue on in their dream-state, suffering
under the self-delusion that somehow they are actually accomplishing great
things here - while the world continues to rip itself apart and the spiritual
physicians most needed reside in a nightmare of their own making?
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From hwmiller@ccnet.comWed Nov 29 10:41:38 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 23:03:37 -0700
From: Henry Miller
To: sabredance <100725.315@compuserve.com>
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: my goodness sakes
Dear Janine, regarding your posting, excerpted as follows:
>It is also a realisation of mine, and this may sound harsh, that no new world
>order is built without people getting scars. It is part of the process, yet it
>is damn painful.
>I have come to believe, after many tests, that trust, compassion and love are
>some of the true gems and riches in life. After all, these are what the soul
>will take with it, after leaving our bodies..... and these will give us
>happiness, true happiness, while still in this world.
>
>This all is not intended to silence the mouths of those who *do* suffer! Often
>realisation is only born after we have heard the painful stories of others.
>much love,
>janine van rooij
>amsterdam, the netherlands
Your posting moved me to take down from my bookshelf The Seven Valleys, by
Baha'u'llah. I was looking for the following:
"The steed of this Valley is pain; and if there be no pain this
journey will
never end. " (Valley of Love, from The Seven Valleys, page 20,
1992 Centenary Edition, Nightingale Books)
and:
"Wherefore must the veils of the satanic self be burned away at the
fire of love, that the spirit may be purified and cleansed and
thus may know
the station of the Lord of the Worlds." (Valley of Love,
from The Seven Valleys, page 26, 1992 Centenary Edition, Nightingale
Books)
I recall another posting in which Phillip B. was responding to Robert J.
about "scars." I believe perfect healing (no, not physical immortality :-]
) is possible in spite of (and often, perhaps, only because of) scars
accumulated during our striving and struggles. Pain, if reframed and
redeemed, becomes the opportunity for integrating more of "my-self." The
Long Healing Prayer is one of the most potent prayers given us, is it not?
How many of us are still struggling to "overcome," rather than giving into
our pain, praying for healing, (as opposed to giving way to sorrow, which
is not what I am suggesting)? In my experience it was the cracking of my
body "armor" and the opening of my heart (a kind of heart attack, if you
will) that allowed my pain to surface, and when I sobbed and wept and gave
myself over to Baha'u'llah, only then did I start to appreciate my true
helplessness......"to my powerlessness and to Thy might."
Again, from The Seven Valleys:
"Love accepteth no existence and wisheth no life: He seeth life in
death, and in shame seeketh glory." (Valley of Love, from The Seven
Valleys, page 22, 1992 Centenary Edition, Nightingale Books)
The time in my life when I experienced the felt pain of perceived shame
and humiliation the most fiercely was also the time when I felt
Baha'u'llah's buoying presence in the most raw yet energetic sense. If I
had not accepted that "eating of my hat," or of my "shadow," as Robert Bly
might say, I might well have lost a precious opportunity as I now perceive
it, looking back. One of the keys, as I see it, is in the acceptance of an
energy which is deeper and yet fuller than my ego's controlling parameters.
If the intact, healthy ego can be given to the flames, after sufficient
heat and inner focus can be generated within - through prayer, meditation,
and service - then that painful process of coming to grips with loss,
abandonment fears, and other traumas, etc. can be allowed residence within
one's heart on a conscious level. Unless we were born inwardly and
outwardly united, how can we escape this passage? In fact, all the fears,
traumas, etc. are already there; it is just (a painful 'just') the self's
saying "yes" to opening the door to the heart and allowing that "shadowy
stuff" to be acknowledged, sorted out/ worked with, and thus purified and
redeemed.
Janine, in another posting today, that of Juan Cole (12:16 AM 11/28/95,
knowing the self / Zen & Baha'i) to Talisman, he stated:
> I don't
>think we yet fully understand within the Faith what psychological
>effort and spiritual attentiveness might really mean. But these are Sufi
>technical terms, and I do not think Baha'u'llah meant by them a sort of
>"Protestant go-to-church-on-Sunday and occasionally say a short
>prayer" spirituality.
It is in this particular area of study, as pointed to by intimation in
Juan's sentences above, that I think we need to concentrate. ( This not so
much in scholarly or academic journal terms as a first priority - and that
is not to say those terms are unimportant - but in an existential,
experiential, human development sense before anything else. ) It is a
spiritualization of the individual question, just as it has always been in
the sense of the "perennial philosophy." It is Zen, it is Baha'i, it is
Buddhist, it is "esoteric psychology" coming out of the closet. It is the
stuff of self-transformation by way of the mental focus, "spiritual
attentiveness,"(as Juan terms it), and psychological work which an
individual attempts within the context of daily life and community.
It is, of course, still permeated with mystery as well, but it is
emerging as the subject/object of an integrative science of a
cross-disciplinary sort. Enter the scientists and scholars now, please.
Of necessity, they bump into the dilemma of what it means to "prove"
something, and they are faced with all the requisite definitions of terms,
and epistemological work which goes into the "owning" and "grounding" of
knowledge by scholars, researchers, and investigators, first for
peer-review, and later for general consumption. Many new journals dealing
with this integrative field, the area in which religion and science meet
and confound us, are appearing. For example, the journal entitled Subtle
Energies is published by the International Society For The Study Of Subtle
Energies And Medicine. There is the Journal of Consciousness Studies, and
many others. The Institute of Noetic Science is working in this area.
Biofeedback was, perhaps, the first real popularized Western science
response to "capturing" and applying the effects of mind-body unity, if I
am not mistaken. Yogis, mystics, indigenous peoples, shamans, and others
have claimed to have experienced in various ways this "guiding" and
"directing" of energy (towards the ongoing goal of a changed, transformed
self, in terms of human development and evolution) as one effect of inner
self-transformation. They have done it without boxes and wires, because
their cultural myths, maps, and icons around "Science" have been different
ones. Individuals, however, have allowed themselves to be subjected to
measurements and tests, demonstrating thereby an ability to modulate heart
rate, brain waves, and other physiological processes. As with a miracle,
unless one has experienced it, the effect lands on deaf ears. Even if an
investigator is curious, the "effect" can be ignored or soon forgotten
since it does not fit into his/her schema or paradigm. The materialistic
investigator will return and deny the validity and importance of
"subjective" and personal experience - "prove it," he/she continues to say,
unable to allow into the mix a possiblity of other factors at work. With
the beginnings of biofeedback, however, and the introduction of
accupuncture, accupressure, etc. and martial arts-derivative
cross-fertilizations from the more inner-oriented East, we are starting to
see a shift towards greater admissibility of "subjective" data as an object
of research in the science/religion field, and away from polarized,
detached outllooks which require fragmented study rather than attempts at
synthesizing.
(This is an aside, really, but perhaps a more "inner" investigation is
just as scary and threatening for some of us, as the type of more "outer"
related historiography dealing with the nitty-gritty of the past is for
others of us. The inner game is like Hide The Thimble, and the outer game,
it seems to me, is more like Pick Up Sticks). Every question is ultimately
a philosophical question, though, and we each independently must develop
our own perspective on a philosophy of history.
One of the keys to staying on track, I think, is in being wary of
confusing mere statements or "beliefs" with work"accomplished," or
experience "integrated," or facts "established." It is an ongoing dialectic
of sorts in which the individual is asked, implicitly and explicitly, to
explain himself, or exhibit DEEDS, either in the upright character of his
worshipful work, or right down to the cellular integrity of his very
physiology - breath, heart beat, thought patterns, and so on.
We can trust, however, since we have the reassurance that this is the
Day of God, the day in which all things shall be made evident in good time,
no matter how painful. No matter. Whether approached from an Eastern
perspective, or from a Western perspective, which*are* cultural realities
since we still carry acculturations and legacies of training and
upbringing, the reality is really just One perennial reality. Isn't our
goal to "ingather" (is that from Gerard Manley Hopkins?) more of this
"reality", thus facilitating change, development, and evolution? (I have
to go back and find the prayer in which the Faith of God is referred to as
"neither of the East nor of the West." This is the day of Oneness, is it
not?!
Perhaps many of the postings on Talisman which reflect irritation with
the outward- reaching discussions about "reforms, courts, perceived and/or
real injustices, etc." are really reminding us that the journey to the
love, tenderness, and harmony of a new world doesn't have to be SUCH a
painful journey of community development. I think it is painful for
certain, but it is also a process originating at least as much from
acceptance of painful *inner* change as it is from the focus on outer
adjustments. We do have the wisdom, hopefully, to alleviate and lessen the
pain we bring upon ourselves and others near us - especially our friends.
Balance requires that we play both games at times - Hide The Thimble *and*
Pick Up Sticks. We need the precision of Pick Up Sticks, but that surgical
and uncovering skill needs to be floating in the love and comaraderie of a
game of Hide The Thimble......"warmer, warmer, warmer,....yes!....hot,
hotter...!"
At any rate, thanks for your loving posting about the "riches" of pain,
Henry
Henry W. Miller
Martinez, California,U.S.A.
hwmiller@ccnet.com
hwmiller@eworld.com
510-372-0709
From jrcole@umich.eduWed Nov 29 10:43:09 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 02:00:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Talisman rights
Friends:
Please help me out here. It seems that
1) I cannot tell right from wrong because I do not have a degree in
ethics (though I should say that a good deal of my education in
Philosophy, Religion and Islamics did deal with ethics).
2) Violating persons' human rights is not wrong if a Baha'i institution
did it.
3) All Baha'is are to turn a blind eye to injustices within the Baha'i
community, committed over and over again--in perfect confidence that
these will be righted by persons wiser than we. We are to be
fatalistic, accepting whatever our institutions decree as the will of
God, keeping our silence, blindly obedient to these institutions which have
absolute authority and are in possession of the full facts. But this is
not a totalitarian system.
[Except what do I do about Baha'u'llah's explicit abolition of absolute
authority [as-sultah al-mutlaqah] on the basis that Reason has
become manifest among all [zuhur al-`aql bayn al-kull]? Has this passage
of Baha'u'llah been abrogated? By whom? When? What do I do about
`Abdu'l-Baha's insistence on the right of freedom of conscience
(azadigi-yi vujdan)? About his desire that elections be so arranged as
to make elected officials act justly for fear of being unelected (Secret
of Divine Civilization)? If all injustices are covered up and remain
private and we all keep our silence, then how exactly can `Abdu'l-Baha's
principle be implemented? What do we say about Shoghi Effendi's explicit
statement that he was not empowered to legislate, or about our own
knowledge that he was not empowered to abrogate Baha'u'llah's principles,
though as Head of the Faith he could legitimately set them aside for
practical reasons at any one point?]
The system that has been described in 3) is incompatible with the most
profound principles Revealed by Baha'u'llah, and with those enunciated
by `Abdu'l-Baha. It is also incompatible with the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, which the Universal House of Justice has endorsed as a
cornerstone of world peace. 3) Derives largely from an authoritarian,
acontextual and tendentious reading of the practical suggestions of the
Guardian at a time when there were *very* few Baha'is and the US was more
like a face to face community.
With the emergence of a Baha'i civil society, of a public sphere in
cyberspace, of a very large world Baha'i community, we need to rethink
how to achieve *Baha'u'llah*'s goals in the 21st century. And although
it is painful for some Baha'is to admit this, the very best guide to how
to achieve those goals may be neither the historically conditioned
decisions of a Guardian functioning without an authoritative legislative
body, nor the policies adopted after his death, which on the whole
literally replicate bounded decisions of the 1930s and 1940s, without
thinking how these correlate with the Revelation of Baha'u'llah over the
long run.
Cheers, Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
From forumbahai@es.co.nzWed Nov 29 10:46:54 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 20:31 GMT+1300
From: Alison & Steve Marshall
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: institutional power/ trusting the institutions
"I wish you had something more useful to contribute, Steve, than these
infrequent letters in which a censorial introversion is veiled by
wishy-washy and confused arguments."
Dear Robert,
I am deeply hurt by what you have said, and am at a loss to understand why
you felt it was necessary to say it. Don't years of friendship and working
together count for anything? How is that you can blithely say cruel and
cutting things, when you have sat in our lounge, drunk cups of tea and
laughed and shared life with us?
Alison
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alison and Steve Marshall
Email: forumbahai@es.co.nz
90 Blacks Road, Opoho, Dunedin/Otepoti, Aotearoa/New Zealand
--------------------------------------------------------------
From burlb@bmi.netWed Nov 29 10:48:37 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 00:05 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: alma@indirect.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: anti-Baha'i file
When I first unzipped the Covenant Breaker material I wondered how in the
world did those whacko Montana nutcakes get my e-mail address, especially
this one (I have two) which I only use for communicating with my talispals
and fellow mystery writers -- and I don't think the Mystery Writers of
America are promulgating this spiritual virus. Then it dawned on me that
someone on Talisman may have sent me this. I certainly didn't request it!
For those of you who don't know what it is, it is *not* anti-Baha'i material
(vanilla: Baha'u'llah is not a prophet and the Baha'is are wrong and bad and
or confused) but full-blown brains to pluto CB garbage which I have had the
displeasure of seeing before. Before curiosity gets the better of you - or
the worse of you- I will give the cut to the chase bottom line:
The bottom line: An ex-convict in Montana claims to be Jesus, and also
happens to support the absurd Covenant Breaker reasoning of the late Mason
Remey. For complete details on Mr. Remey's assault on the Covenant, read all
about it in graphic detail in "The Covenant of Baha'u'llah." It will answer
all your questions.
2. Now, this guy in Montana claims that he is Jesus, that no one can come to
the Father except through him. He insists that God's Holy Mountain is in
Montana, and that most of the Bible prophecies are about Butte, Missoula,
etc. and that the prophecies of the Great Pyramid prove that he is really
the return of Jesus and that he is supposed to be the head of the Baha'i
Faith, and not the Universal House of Justice. He has, "as promised" ,
appeared in Deer Lodge, Montana to establish the "true" Baha'i Faith with
him as, surprise, the one to be worshipped and adored. If we don't, we will
all be killed by a comet, earthquake, or nuclear explosion. I didn't have
to read the file to figure this out because it is nothing new.
As this group invokes and quotes from Baha'u'llah, Abdul-Baha, Shoghi
Effendi, it is sickening -- it is truly like poison -- it turns my
sensitive stomach to see this garbage, so I choose not to read it when I
come across it, which I do often because they keep sending me this stuff by
snail mail , and now by computer. I believe that the soul gags when it sees
the Holy Words of Baha'u'llah, the Master, and The Guardian defiled in this
manner. It causes aggitation and dismay. Phoooey! Nothing against Montana,
but Burl thinks the arc looks better on Mt Carmel, thank you.
These nuts love to also send out press releases claiming that the "Head of
the Baha'i Faith" insists the world is going to blow up on Tuesday. Of
course, it doesn't and people think that we Baha'is are nuts, not realizing
that this joker in Montana is not a Baha'i, let alone the leader of our
Beloved Faith.
So it goes. It is a sick, sick, use of the Baha'i Holy Writings to have the
Will and Testament, etc., mangled into some hodge-podge to "support" this
character's bizarre absurd ramblings about Pyramid, comets, Mormon visions,
the primacy of Montana in the Book of Revelation (!) and other such hoo-hah.
I wish they would stop sending me this stuff but I don't know how to get my
name off their mailing list. As I am no longer working for the Protection
Board, I should not have to be subjected to it.
Now, however, I have seen the light -- I would rather get 100 copies of The
Seed of Creation annotated with complete biological footnotes plus 5,000
editions of "Sherman's Great Thoughts: Catnip and the Covenant" than ever
have to deal with this!
Burl
PS: were it not forbidden, we could dispatch Linda Ninja to Deer Lodge and
have her go at him with her 9" nails. Oh well, now we know why we have a
Protection Board and a delete key..
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpWed Nov 29 10:49:17 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 17:31:11 JST
From: "Stephen R. Friberg"
To: TLCULHANE@aol.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Wilmette , Berlin and America
Dear Terry:
> To Stephen : My rousing defense of America will have to wait until I
> return from a two day business trip.
Aw shucks!
> The general outline will go something
> like this as a thought experiment. Suppose there was a member of a religious
> community who decided to live in a socio cultural setting that was not
> native to him or her. Suppose further that this missionary informed the
> natives that their legal, political, religious, cultural life in general
> was gravely deficient .
But gee! I always rather liked the Pilgrims!
> Suppose further that our missionary informed the
> natives of that land that our hero had something that was perfect in every
> way and that true bliss and salvation awaited the natives if only they would
> reject their gravely deficient ways, legal, political, religious, and
> cultural and all of its attendent history .
The Maiden?
> Suppose further that the natives
> did not rush to embrace the "truth " of this perfect way brought to them by
> our missionary from abroad . In fact they, being reasonably tolerant beings
> in the face of such affronts to their honor and identity , just ignored both
> our hero and his / her message . So now what ?
The natives were forcibly converted, or killed, and then they were
put on reservations, no?
Terry, are you sure this is a good ole' patriotic American story?
Yours,
Steve
From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpWed Nov 29 10:49:30 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 18:00:13 JST
From: "Stephen R. Friberg"
To: Robert Johnston
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Institutional power / trusting the institutions
Dear Robert:
Really a low! Why so hard-hearted? Give us a poem, a simile,
a dance in the rain, light upon light, the Marlboro man, steaming
up the jungle, death in the alley.
But not dismissal . . .
I hide in shame and disgrace.
Steve
From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpWed Nov 29 10:49:42 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 18:08:45 JST
From: "Stephen R. Friberg"
To: Alethinos@aol.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: It's 3 O'Clock in the morning and their screaming in Bakersfield, CA.
Dear Jim:
> I guess what I am saying, and please Terry pay close attention here - the
> subtlety may get squeaky tight.
What subtlety?
Steve F.
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzWed Nov 29 10:50:02 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 23:31:29 +1200
From: Robert Johnston
To: "Stephen R. Friberg" , forumbahai@es.co.nz,
talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: strung like piano wires (was: Institutional power / trusting the institutions)
Dear Steve and Steve and Alison,
Stephen F wrote:
>
>I hide in shame and disgrace.
If that's the effect of my letter on our inevitably fair physicist friend
from from Japan, (echoed in Alison's equally heart-rending letter) then
I'll have to admit to being somehow badly wrong.
It must have been an evil day inside Johnston's head.
I guess the fan belt broke and the radiator boiled.
Sorry.
I'll try to do better.
Robert (strung like piano wires) Johnston.
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzWed Nov 29 10:50:28 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 00:43:14 +1200
From: Robert Johnston
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: enigmatically physicistic, imagining a red sun....
As I grow older my soul gathers in on itself
and is a clumping peasant with a Heidegger face.
Where is that true poet Dave who called me
so correctly a pumpkin when he could have said bumpkin?
I first met Alison before Zohar stuck her finger
in butter and upset me in the lost years, up Central.
Steve then lived in the far south next door to Linda Hight,
And I sometimes stayed in the house. Steve smiling.
Ahh the passage of time...Sen built a boat in his back yard,
and Sonja, even then, walloped me like a zen nun...
***************
Emily Dickinson
XVI. The Wind.
It 's like the light,--
A fashionless delight
It 's like the bee,--
A dateless melody.
It 's like the woods,
Private like breeze,
Phraseless, yet it stirs
The proudest trees.
It 's like the morning,--
Best when it 's done,--
The everlasting clocks
Chime noon.
From belove@sover.netWed Nov 29 10:51:03 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 18:35:09 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: Milissa
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re:uppitiness
On Tue, 28 Nov 95 16:33:02 CST Milissa wrote:
>Hi Philip!
>
>Just wanted to drop you a line to say thanks for your response. It
really
>makes me feel better to know you guys are alright and not upset at
the idea
>of a female Manifestation. :)
>
>Uppitiness is a good attribute!
>
>Milissa
Hi Milissa!
1) Isn't uppitiness the most amazing word when you see it in print!
2) Actually, I think the pre-abramic manifestations were female. I
think the next round will be a couple. The manifestation gives
witness to his/her/their message with his/her/their whole life. The
greatest mystery is getting along with a separate 'nother person.
It really is astounding how few couples there are in all history and
even mythology, compared to the individual heros.
The only current ones I can think of are the show business partners.
Hume Cronin and Jessica Tandy. some others. None recently.
George and Barbara didn't do it for me. I had hopes for the Clintons.
I think some of the Christian televangelist have been working that
for a while.
Dr. and Mrs. Ruhe are a trip and a half!
3) I grew up in a Jewish Family where the men were all artistic and
flighty, or retiring and gentle and the women were decisive,
practical and in complete authority. Uppitiness is not a word I would
ever apply to a woman taking charge.
The men handled the big questions like , the true meaning of
Passover, and the women handled the little questions like, rules for
the kids, how money was spent, whether to move to a new neighborhood.
When grandma didn't want to deal with a salesman she would tell him,
"You better speak to my husband." He was a tailor and the salesman
would speak to him as he worked at the sewing machine. Grandma knew
that sometimes he liked company.
3) is UKAN in Kansas or the United Kingdom?
Beloved in Brattleboro,
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 11/28/95
Time: 18:35:09
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
From belove@sover.netWed Nov 29 10:53:23 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 07:00:26 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: talisman rights, cov.breaker readings, etc.
Dear all,
The more I read these postings, the more I am convinced that Jaun's
is a critically important voice in the future of the faith.At least
in the future of the faith in my life.s
I would have left long ago rather than subscribe to certain
viewpoints that seems to surface here.
It's helped me to read widely among these postings. I've begun to
appreciate how some of the positions taken by Bahai's are not
authoritative, but merely someone's wishful thinking.
I have many friends amoung the Friends who would have not read the
posting because someone "told her not to. "they told us not to and so
I didn't." and it comes across to me with an air of "truer devotion
than thou. Here is how I handled it, here is how it should be
handled, let this be an example to you."
But it is not an example I would choose to follow.
Brent, I think it was, pointed out that his preferred reading was
"advised us against." I can live with that.
Once when I was interviewing various clergy folk in the community I
interviews a minister who insisted on the world being 5000 years old
and the fossil record being placed there by God to challenge our
faith. I asked him, why is it that you, an intellingent and
scientifically minded man who hold to such a cumbersome and
questionable belief? He said he preferred believing as he did about
evolution to allowing his trust in the veracity of scripture to be
challenged.
And that made clear to me a certain dimension of Fundamentalism. I
called it,"militant Naivete."
Robert Bly had an opinion about naivete. He felt it occured in men
who had not yet faced their shadow, acknowledged their pain and
wounds, and had not yet developed the capacity to be abhorred by
their own actions. (He was speaking in Iron John specifically about
men and didn't comment whether he extended his observation to women.)
These observations are in the personal realm, although I think they
could be extended to Fundamentalist movements in the social realm. I
think it is characteristic of fundamentalisms to be militantly naive,
to have a severely limited capacity to view their own shadow sides,
to acknowledge and accept their woundedness, and, most importantly,
to be aware of, and genuinely afraid of, their own capacity to harm
others.
"When you've been a Bahai as long as I have, then you'll understand
better." The more I think about this sentence, the more monstrous it
becomes.
Love,
Belove
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 11/29/95
Time: 07:00:26
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduWed Nov 29 10:58:26 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 08:10:06 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Response to Dan
Dear Dan,
I read your response to the letter of UHJ regarding homosexuality..
I have very dear friends who are homosexuals. I attended a few
workshops on the subject to understand the issues and individuals who
are affected by them. No matter how liberal minded a heterosexual is,
deep down inside the act of homosexual behaviour does seem repugnant
to them. I'll be honest it is easier for me to be friends with a gay
guy than a lesbian woman. It just feels uneasy. But, I will do
anything to defend them as human beings without accepting and
understanding the behavviour itself. It is also difficult to
understand the analogy between being a black person and a homosexual.
One is behavior oriented the other is nature. This is my view.
Please help us to understand and don't be angry. To really tell you
the truth I was just heart broken to find out that Rock Hudson
was gay
As to the Aids epidemic. Would the Homosexual community and Hollywood
be just as eager to help victims of Aids if there were no effects on
gay community? I lost a niece of 9 years old to aids who was
hemopphiliac and received contaminated blood. In less than a year
later her mother died from a broken heart. So, we are all affected by
this one way or another.
lovingly
from the ignorance ghetto,
quanta...(*_*)
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduWed Nov 29 11:05:42 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 09:52:44 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: breathing space
Dear Jim, you are so emphatic that we all really should know exactly what we
should be doing and go out and DO IT! Well, to tell you the truth, I know
longer know just what it is I am supposed to do. Am I supposed to go invite
people to join a religion where I see my friends being excluded for being
"different," for having exploring minds, for speaking out on issues that they
believe in? Jim, if this is supposed to be the religion for all people, a
religion that truly believes in the diversity of humanity, then we are going to
have to have to have an administrative system that is highly flexible, that
accepts diversity (and I am not just talking about us having different shades
of skin color), and is not threatened by differing viewpoints.
It is one thing to say, let by-gones be by-gones. I am perfectly willing to do
that. However, the same offenses seem to be arising on a daily basis. Only
yesterday I learned of a case of someone losing his voting rights because he
was accused of an immoral sexual act. The accuser, interestingly, changed his
story a couple of times and was also suffering from a debilitating illness.
The accused never had an opportunity to defend himself. The accusation came
and a letter was sent to the accused telling him that his rights as a Baha'i
had been lifted. He was also told that it was highly unlikely that they would
ever be re-instated. BTW, there were no witnesses to this action. The accuser
said that it was done in private. No matter. Case closed. This case follows
several others of late in which the accused has no recourse. In one case, an
individual was told in writing that he could not see the evidence against him
because he "already knew what he had done." Actually, this person, whom I
know, hadn't a clue as to what Baha'i law he had ever broken or what he had
ever done to shame the Faith. He thought he was serving the Faith and the
Baha'is. He is a heartbroken man.
And, tell me, what is Dan Orey supposed to do? Did Dan wake up one morning and
say, gee, I think I'll be gay and see how the Baha'is are going to handle THIS
one? I think not. From my communication with Dan (e-mail and a telephone
conversation - and by the way, I have only met about three members of Talisman
face-to-face), I think I can say that he is not a person who goes around
flaunting his sexuality. He is not making a disgrace of himself. He is not
touting sexual promiscuity. He simply is what he is. What should he do about
this? Hate himself? He amazes me that he is still willing to patiently
educate the Bahas and to bear the criticisms.
Now, to change the subject a bit. Quanta, I thought your comment about gay men
and lesbian women was very interesting. Since we are bearing our souls, I will
tell you that I have exactly the same experience as you. I feel far more
comfortable with gay men than with lesbians, something I am not particularly
happy about. However, I don't believe that it is helpful to deny one's
feelings. With lesbians I often have the sense that there is a degree of
hostility towards both men and towards femininity that I am uncomfortable with.
I do not sense anti-female or anti-male attitudes in gay men. It is not as
though I have a great deal of experience and knowledge in this matter. This is
simply based on the experience I do have.
Also, I have read that women are far more likely to become or to realize their
homosexual orientation later in life - often in their post child bearing years.
Men, on the other hand, seem to recognize (at least at some level) their
homosexuality early in life. This leads me to wonder if male and female
homosexuality aren't two quite different phenomena.
Dan mentioned Middle Eastern homosexuality in his posting. He raises a very
important point. "Homosexuality" is not a single thing. It takes different
forms. We should remember that in Baha'u'llah's day it took the form of grown
men having sex with young boys. Perhaps that is why Baha'u'llah speaks so
strongly against it.
Must go. Linda
From margreet@margreet.seanet.comWed Nov 29 11:05:49 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 07:48:27 -0800
From: "Marguerite K. Gipson"
To: StrayMutt@aol.com, Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Baha'i singles ads
Hello all, We have the Bahai Singles email forum, and will have our first
wedding from that next month.... There have been a few more unions from
people on Bahai Singles, but they had already met the intended one. The
one piece I like about it the forum is that you get to know the personality
and character thru the written word, and never have to worry about the
physical attraction part just yet. I read on some forum about the test???
was that here??? Where a man was waiting for his beloved, each had signs
(his: a book, hers: a rose) to watch for the other, and he spotted a young
woman first, and an older one too wearing her rose like she said... and he
passed the test.....
Back in 1983 or 84, a women from Florida develop a company for Bahai's to
run ads to seek out potential mates... A newsletter was formed, and you got
the news letter and then you wrote letters to each other. A few married
from that too....
Warmly, Margreet...
Matchmaker, Matchmaker Make me a match.....
At 12:11 AM 11/29/95 -0500, StrayMutt@aol.com wrote:
>In some recent postings on the topic of Baha'i singles, it was suggested that
>The American Baha'i run a "personal ads" section to help unmarried Baha'i men
>and women find one another. If such a thing were to come to pass (seems kind
>of unlikely), would the results look something like this?
>
> Desperately Seeking Spirituality
>
>Can you handle 230 lbs of all man? Just think of me as the Most Great Body.
> I'm a marriage-minded guy with no bad habits who is dangerously handsome.
> I'm looking for a good, virtuous woman. No smoking, pets or kids. And no
>low-fat diet types, either.
>
>
> Looking For Mr. Good Guy
>
>Spiritual Sagittarius and a Southern belle, as well. Seeking respectable,
>attractive professional man who prefers women who value sensible shoes,
>higher consciousness and old-fashioned virtues. No kinky stuff and no easy
>familiarity.
>
>
> In the Valley of Search
>
>Cultured, single Baha'i female seeks man of same inclinations. My idea of
>fun is firesides and deepening classes, reading aloud from the Writings,
>strict chastity and fasting.
>
>
> Nice Baha'i Boy
>
>Well, I used to be one once upon a time. Now, what the hell, I'm on the
>wrong side of 50 and twice divorced. Looking for a babe who's blonde all
>over. Object: pioneering / missionary position.
>
>
>(Anonymous Donor)
>
From Alethinos@aol.comWed Nov 29 11:06:09 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 10:48:53 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: breathing space
Linda:
THERE is no doubt that we are suffering . . . but what exactly we are
suffering from and the *cure* IS the debate I wish to engage in here - this
continued complaining _serves no useful purpose_! It takes us nowhere. Hell
no I don't want to invite my friends to the Faith as it stands in America now
- but the fault lies not in the _institutions_ but in us as AMERICANS. Read
what the Guardian warned us of - really read it - and you will realize he
predicted we would be here - just as we are now - and that THIS is the trap -
and the solution he give also - a solution too radical for must of us to
swallow.
gotta go too,
jim harrison
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduWed Nov 29 11:10:26 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 23:45:04 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Juan R Cole
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The Bab's Grammar
As a non-Arabic speaker, I want to express my gratitude to Juan, and also
to Chris in his book "Symbol and Secret," for explaining some of these
language issues that are so important in the Faith. I greatly appreciate
the intellectual bridge you provide.
Juan, thanks too for the Zen-Baha'i comparison that I thought was right on.
Brent
From rstockman@usbnc.orgWed Nov 29 11:11:01 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 95 17:47:39
From: "Stockman, Robert"
To: Juan R Cole
Subject: Re[2]: Talisman rights
As one who knows as many fact as Juan, I disagree. I have yet to see
any of the allegedly totalitarian actions he implies are emanating
from Baha'i institutions. Are we to assume the House of Justice turns
its back on injustice; or is totally ignorant of blatantly unjust
actions carried out by its most important NSA; or is incapable or
recognizing injustice when a few academics with no training in ethics
can see it; or simply doesn't care? I am afraid I disagree. I do
think that the word "Covenant" become operative in some sort of
theological sense at this point; unless, of course, we are to conclude
God doesn't act either.
-- Rob Stockman
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Talisman rights
Author: Juan R Cole at INTERNET
Date: 11/28/95 9:21 AM
Stephen: I am sorry you were earlier misunderstood. All of us have been
misunderstood. But no one more than John Walbridge at this juncture.
Tomorrow things may be clearer. I actually hope not.
*But*, with all due love, affection and buddha-mind, I must take the
strongest possible exception to your statement that my proposed bill of
rights would have made John Walbridge's actions impossible. This is
simply not true. A bill or rights does not revoke criminal law; it
simply ensures that people are not treated like criminals for thinking,
writing, & etc. I have no problem with Baha'is having their
administrative rights taken away for a long-term and embarrassing alcohol
problem, spousal abuse, or felonies. Neither would a Baha'i bill of rights.
Threatening a member of Talisman because of his posting is the equivalent
of a crime. It is like reading an article you disagree with, and,
instead of replying with better arguments and documentation, deciding to
go over to his house and break his legs with baseball bats. No bill of
rights would protect you from prosecution if you bullied someone like that.
And when the police arrested the guys with the baseball bats, you would
not normally expect the ACLU to get too excercised about it.
The cries of outrage over John's reconsideration of subscription rights
of persons who work for the issuer of the threat would be much muted
among civilized persons if the full facts were known.
cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 10:53:53 -0800
From: an assistant to the ABM
To: jrcole@umich.edu
Subject: RE: Re: Baha'i Bill of Rights/criminal code
Dear Juan,
There is some progress here, despite the polemics, and I'll
get to the substance of that question in a minute.
There is, however, a very grave misunderstanding on your
part with respect to my position. I don't believe that the
secrecy surrounding issues involving administrative
rights is good or bad. That is a value judgment which
I will specifically disavow. There is only, and there should
be only, the statements of `Abdu'l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi
and the Universal House of Justice regarding the proper
conduct of an institution's administrative affairs, and
whether or not the institution's conduct (or the conduct
of the members of that institution) is in accordance with
the guidance laid down by these heads of the Faith.
Now, you wrote:
From: Juan R Cole[SMTP:jrcole@umich.edu]
>> In US courts of law, there exists a notion of burden of proof.
>Oh, if I were putting someone on trial, I would want to have better
>evidence than I do. But the evidence I have is perfectly respectable as
>a basis for coming to journalistic and historical conclusions, such as
>that the system is dysfunctional with regard to intellectuals.
First, it's not the nature of the conclusions themselves that is
problematic. It's what you have chosen to do with those conclusions,
or, to put it slightly differently, what you can do with those
conclusions and still remain within the bounds of proper conduct
for an individual member of the Faith.
If you state these conclusions in a letter to a member of the Auxiliary
Board or the Continental Counselors or the Universal House of Justice,
then there is no problem. However, if you want to express them in
a public forum, then a higher standard of evidence applies. At all times,
and under all conditions, your conduct must remain within the very
clear bounds outlined in documents like _Individual Rights and
Freedoms_. You have proposed a solution to the problem, but,
because of the rather lax standard of evidence you are using for
your conclusions, you really haven't a clue as to whether your
solution will improve things or hurt them in some other way.
It seems to me as though you'd like to have an open forum in which
you could state your conclusions as they stand (and without the
benefit of stronger evidence). But, doesn't this constitute a trial in
the court of public opinion? Indeed, this is one of the repugnant
features of the US system. The authority of this government's
institutions has slowly been eroded away over the past 30 years
by a free press that sees fit to air all sorts of accusations and
ridiculous claims based upon a standard of evidence sufficient
to support a "journalistic" conclusion. Please, don't inflict this
ridiculousness on Baha'u'llah's Administrative Order.
If that weren't enough, your theory that the Administrative
Order is dysfunctional with respect to intellectuals doesn't
have an adequate explanation for some observed phenomena
(e.g. Peter Khan, Adib Taherzadeh and Bahiyyih Nakhjavani
to name but a few). You might try to fit the existence of these
persons into your model. It would go well toward strengthening
your arguments.
>I know this is hard for you to understand, but try to walk a mile in my
>shoes.
Why should this be important, Juan? I'm not judging you. I'm
judging the efficacy of your ideas and the strength of your arguments.
Are you claiming some form of gnostic ability to present ideas
without having to justify those ideas because of your experience?
I have not told you anything of substance about my own experience
for the very reason that this is a subtle form of ad hominem argument.
Were I to relate some of my experiences during the more than 25
years that I've been a believer in Baha'u'llah (I don't remember a time
when I did not believe in Baha'u'llah), I think you'd reconsider your
conclusion that I find this hard to understand.
As for the notion of having some incompetent idiot review the
code I write, it doesn't quite compare to a policy set down by
the Universal House of Justice. As I might be annoyed by the
former, _any_ idea I have which is manifestly at variance with
something stated by the Universal House of Justice gets
immediate reconsideration (and that reconsideration does not
consist of finding ways to convince myself that I'm right and
that the Universal House of Justice is wrong). I'm not fond of
running into brick walls.
>Your general point appears to be that I should sit down, shut up and let
>wise persons such as yourself "handle" the problems, about which I cannot
>possibly know enough to form a considered judgment, even when they
>directly impinge on me and my close friends.
This is a more subtle form of the polemics of which I spoke
earlier. Have I ever claimed wisdom? Have I ever said that
you should not discuss the broader issues? If I thought that
you should sit down and shut up, would you and I be having
this discussion at all?
Juan, you can take what I've said seriously or not. That's up
to you. On the other hand, I care about you and the things
you are capable of doing for this Faith.
Let me put it this way. This is the Cause of God we're talking
about. It will survive no matter what [we]
do. I have neither the need nor the ability to protect this
Cause. Why, then, do you suppose I continue to participate
in this discussion?
Warmest Regards,
From jrcole@umich.eduWed Nov 29 11:57:21 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:10:13 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The Bab's Grammar
Brent: While we're on the subject of important contributions, I want to
express my gratitude publicly to you for your engaged openness,
moderation of tone, intelligent argumentation with careful use of sources,
and profound sincerity of belief. You are a paragon of Baha'u'llah's
instruction that when we see a spiritual truth someone else does not, we
should offer it to them gently.
much love Juan
On Tue, 28 Nov 1995, [G. Brent Poirier] wrote:
>
> As a non-Arabic speaker, I want to express my gratitude to Juan, and also
> to Chris in his book "Symbol and Secret," for explaining some of these
> language issues that are so important in the Faith. I greatly appreciate
> the intellectual bridge you provide.
>
> Juan, thanks too for the Zen-Baha'i comparison that I thought was right on.
>
> Brent
>
From dawnliqu@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduWed Nov 29 15:30:25 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 11:58:52 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Affection of Talismanian mummies
Ahmad Anis wrote:
Dear Talismanians,
Dear Quanta,
>Having got ready on Sunday morning to go to the Australian
>emple for service, I was stoped by the buzz of the phone.
By fairy GOD MOTHER YENTLE knowing you are going to Temple
and wanted to ask for some special prayers.
> you still have a chance with Ayla.
Oooops! phone lines were not working. I think she said Ayla is
interested in people her own age. But, Yentle will find you someone
else. Just send me your picture and I shall begin the search.
>Having heard all that then I departed to go to the temple with a content
>heart. Let me tell you I had your family in my thoughts.
Thank you kindly. How so very nice of such a gentleman.
>
Quanta wrote:
The rapist left his
> "seeds of creation" all over her body and the blanket
Ahmad wrote:
>May I correct your story and suggest that men do not possess seed of
>creation in them, as seed of creation physically means a fertilised egg.
>men's sperm does not qualify for this.
This response is very disconcerting to me. I was not expecting a
continual defense of your theory, just compassionate note on how
terrible it must been for this young mother to be in this horror.
But, as I stated before we have a long way to go.
lovingly,
quanta...(*_*)
From sindiogi@NMSU.EduWed Nov 29 15:32:08 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 10:13:14 -0700 (MST)
From: "S. Indiogine"
To: Juan R Cole
Cc: Burl Barer , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The Bab's Grammar
Regarding Juan's final comment on the quality of Greek in the New Testament.
The Greek of the Gospel of Mark is very 'coarse'. Indeed, Luke and
Matthew who used this gospel did make often the correct grammatical
changes to the parts of GoMark that they included in their gospels.
The Greek style and grammar of the Revelation of John is horrible. This is
also why the Eastern, Greek speaking, Church rejected this book for
centuries. The Latin speaking west read this book as a 'polished'
translation (Vulgata) and accepted the book much earlier than the East.
Eric Indiogine (sindiogi@nmsu.edu), Las Cruces, New Mexico
## True loss is for him whose days have been ##
## spent in utter ignorance of his self ##
-* Baha'u'llah, Words of Wisdom #21 *-
From cbuck@ccs.carleton.caWed Nov 29 15:33:07 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 12:22:12 EST
From: Christopher Buck
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: Christopher Buck
Subject: Mani a Manifestation?
Ishraq-Khavari (I'll have to search for this reference) has
stated that the Baha'i Writings are neutral as regards Mani.
*World Order* published an article some years ago: *Mani and
Manichaeism: A Study in Religious Failure*. In an unpublished letter
to the editor, I took issue with the several grounds on which Mani's
inauthenticity was being argued by the author of that article.
One of the Baha'i criteria against which Mani's claims were
measured was that a Manifestation of God--in particular, the founder of
a religion--ought also to have been the founder of a civilization.
The fact that Manichaeism had been adopted as the state religion
of two Central Asian states more or less refuted such a disqualification.
In *In Iran* (ed. Peter Smith, Studies in the Babi and Baha'i
Religions, vol. 3), I argued that Mani really afforded the only
phenomenological parallel to Baha'u'llah's proclamation as a world
prophet, since Mani appears to have been the first to unite Semitic
and Aryan religious systems in both his proclamation and liturgy.
On several occasions, I have been privately criticized for
drawing such a parallel, but I stand by my comparison (see *A Unique
Escatological Interface: Baha'u'llah and Cross-Cultural Messianism* in
*In Iran*).
Since the term *Sabian* quickly became the Procrustean,
catch-all quranic term for minority religions that did not otherwise
fit into the Arab view of their manifest destiny, I will not take
issue with John's identification of Manichaeans as Sabians, except to
say that, based on the Cologne Mani Codex and other evidence, I think
the *authorial intent* of the Qur'an was that, by the term *Sabians*,
the Qur'an meant *Baptizers*--to wit, Mandaeans (as attested by
Baha'u'llah in the *Kitab-i Badi`* and elsewhere).
One could also make a case for including the Elchasaites (the
Baptist religion in which Mani was raised) as quranic Sabians, but I
doubt this on other grounds (See my article, *The Identification of
the Sabi'un: An Historical Quest* in the July/October 1984 issue of
*The Muslim World*.)
I think we can suspend judgement on Mani, and tentatively
concur with Alessandro Bausani's classification of Manichaeism as a
*Failed Monotheism* in his elegant typology of monotheisms (which I
think Baha'i academics ought to consider adopting) as summarized in
Bausani's classic *Numen* article, *Can Monotheism Be Taught?*
Christopher Buck
**********************************************************************
* * * * * *
* * * Christopher Buck Invenire ducere est.
* * * Carleton University * * *
* * * Internet: CBuck@CCS.Carleton.CA * * *
* * * P O Box 77077 * Ottawa, Ontario * K1S 5N2 Canada * * *
* * * * * *
**********************************************************************
From clarkre@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduWed Nov 29 15:33:36 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 12:52:57 EST
From: RUTH E CLARK
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re:the truth
Dear People,
I had to make a choice of hiding my association with Quanta The
Yentle, or hide from the list. Quanta forgave me for my jokes.
She really is an unusual sort of person, I mean in a good sense.
I'll tell you one little story about her. Quanta and I were walking
on a street near the campus one afternoon. She said "Ruth don't be
scared, this ruggedy looking guy is gonna jump up and hug me right now,
so be cool". Sure enough, this one homeless fellow breaking his
conversation with his friends on the side-walk jumped and yelled "hey
little lady! ( Quanta is the size of a fifth grader) where you been
honey!" then telling everyone how she has helped him on several
occasions and how he would die for her. I must say, I was a bit
uncomfortable being surrounded by bunch of homeless guys with alcohol
breath. But, not Quanta. We keep telling her to be careful when she
keeps carrying on with her compassion business. Please pray for her.
She has an unusual comfort relating to bunch of different folks
without fear. To tell you the truth, that is not Ruth.
Now the reason I call her Yentle. You see I am really opposeto these arranged marriages. It is the
Westerner in me I guess. Especially a young lady being married to an
old man, NO! I don't think so.
I am sorry I can't say much about all these going ons on Talisman
that I don't really understand a bit. But, I'll say that Baha'is are
really nice people. I enjoy seeing so many different people at least
trying to work out their differences honestly here on talisman and
elsewhere. Of course, talisman is a different story alltogether.
Sorry, for taking long,
cheerfully yours,
Ruth
From burlb@bmi.netWed Nov 29 15:34:23 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 09:50 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: Dan Orey
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: A gay Baha'i Responds
>Dear Dan:
I think your characterization of the guidance from the The Universal
House of Justice is more you and not much UHJ. Had I not the letter in front
of me, I would gather from your post that God speaks with prejudice and
disdain -- I don't see that at all:
"To regard homosexuals with prejudice and disdain would be entirely against
the spirit of Baha'i Teachings. The doors are open for all of humanity to
enter the Cause of God, irrespective of their present circumstances; this
invitation applies to homosexuals as well as to any others who are engaged
in practices contrary to the Baha'i Teachings."
I still find an analogy in the enigmatic condition of being a "drug addict"
-- a practice contrary to the Baha'i teachings -- a condition to which a
person is pre-disposed by birth, or is actually born that way, or acquires
the condition via medical treatment, or via injury, or for reasons which no
one fully understands. Say "crack smoking drug addicts" and the mental
images are, to most people, more scary than saying "gay real estate agents"
or "homosexual midgets" or "lesbian ecologists" -- and there are far more
drug addicts than homosexuals. In the Baha'i community, those afflicted
with this genetic defect, psychological whatever, or acquired propensity are
often loath to be forthcoming about thier "test." They run the risk of
arrest, even if they are white collar, white skinned, upper middle class,
although being of color increases the odds of bieng busted, and are liable
to lose their rights if they are obviously altered on a consistent
basis--flagrant disobedience. Now, I am a delightful person, and except for
my table manners, I am not too disgusting -- at least not often -- but it
takes daily vigilence and sacrifice of my "natural" inclination to avoid
doing that which Baha'u'llah forbids. I have not always been successful, but
I strive with greater and lesser degress of successs. I once managed to not
use drugs for almost 13 years! Then there have been times when I could not
manage 13 days, 13 hours.
I know folks who have left the Faith or hide thier faith rather than bring
the Faith they love into disrepute by their actions or risk getting
railroaded out of the Cause by over zealous local custodians..I know addicts
who killed themselves out of desperation and shame. I can't (won't) do that
-- because I am dedicated to this Cause of God and it is my lifeline and
absolute reality --
I see in this letter from the Universal House of Justice manifest love,
wisdom and compassion -- it is not just a letter about homosexuality, but
all manner of human imperfections, be they inborn or acquired, which require
dedication on the part of the individual and compassion and patience on the
part of the community at large. As the Source of All Good says in the letter:
"All of us suffer from imperfections which we must struggle to overcome and
we all need one another's understanding and patience."
For me to attempt rounding up all the "chemically challenged" Baha'is and
have them petition the Supreme Body to change the Faith's teachings about
use of habit forming drugs and intoxicants because we have "good reasons"
for being who we are, and that we have medical reasons for our condition,
and we are not disgusting people at all -- we have clean clothes, decent
manners, never double-dip our chips, and own Volvo station wagons --
(obviously Baha'u'llah was thinking only of Iranian opium dens) -- is as
silly as homosexuals petitioning the Supreme Body to change God's mind about
that behaviour. My opinion.
Burl (no, I am not on drugs today, except nicotine and caffeine) Barer
PS: The Volvo blew up -- I must call AAA and have it towed. This is
obviously the work of Satan, my sworn enemy. It is easier to call AA than
AAA -- you just call them and cry "my car broke down and I want to drink
over it" and right away three big hairy guys run out and fix your car for
free and then take you out for ice cream and coffee. Doesn't work that way
with NA (Narcotic Anonymous) -- if you call them, the three hairy guys run
out, take the car "to get it fixed, you wait here by the side of the road in
the dark and don't move" and then sell it for dope and never even come back
and share it with you! That a joke for all you NA members in the audience
who are now mad at me for portraying addicts as dishonest and
disguting...:-) then there is the one about calling GA (gays anonymous) but
you can see where all this stereotyping leads....
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From cbuck@ccs.carleton.caWed Nov 29 15:35:36 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 12:59:44 EST
From: Christopher Buck
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: Christopher Buck
Subject: Baha'i Peer Review
As an interim reform of an interim Baha'i review system, I
propose that Baha'i review of academic work on the Faith be formally
converted into a Baha'i peer review system.
Under Dr. Robert Stockman (now Associate Professor at De Paul
University in Chicago), my impression is that this kind of system has
already been informally functioning along these lines for some time now.
I propose that we simply formalize it.
As to peer review in the academic world, it's not so perfect
either. I believe that Hinnells should never have allowed MacEoin to
have made this kind of statement in a scholarly publication:
*Baha' Allah's later writings are strongly marked by the influence
of modernist ideas, revealed in his increasing concern with such issues
as disarmament, world government, and inter-religious harmony, which
replace the mystical themes of his earlier writing. These later
writings are, however, rather jejune and stylistically impoverished
in marked contrast to the vigour of his earlier works." (MacEoin, s.v.
*Baha' Allah* in J. R. Hinnells (ed.), *Who's Who of World Religions*
(London: Macmillan, 1992): 44.
One further proposal: I reiterate my proposal that, under a
Baha'i peer review system, a Baha'i academic who passes formal
review three times ought to receive the confidence of the system in
being exempted from further review.
I believe that issues of accuracy are adequately addressed here.
(Issues of *correctness*, however, are distinct from accuracy, and
this, I think, constitutes the unstated agenda of review. I state this
with all due respect.)
Finally, I would like to encourage Counsellors, NSA members
and World Centre staff to enrich the discourse on Talisman, which I am
afraid to say is gaining a rather jaded reputation in Baha'i
administrative circles, so far as I can ascertain second-hand.
(I consent to the forwarding of this letter to other Baha'i
mailgroups, if someone wishes to do so.)
If, as LSAs are encouraged to do, NSAs could take their
constituencies into their confidence, we would all have a fuller
appreciation of why certain policies are the way they are, without
prejudice to the tabling of new proposals. The problem I have with the
theoretically democratic aspect of Baha'i administration is that,
while it is electorally democratic, I am not convinced of its
efficiency as a system of democratic input.
The closest example to democratic involvement at the
ideological level I have seen is the House's semi-private circulation
of a pre-publication draft of *The Promise of World Peace*. I think
this was extraordinary. It was the ultimate informal peer review, as
it were, and an exceptionally democratic act (a non-electoral *vox populus*)
within the context of Baha'i administration.
Christopher Buck
**********************************************************************
* * * * * *
* * * Christopher Buck Invenire ducere est.
* * * Carleton University * * *
* * * Internet: CBuck@CCS.Carleton.CA * * *
* * * P O Box 77077 * Ottawa, Ontario * K1S 5N2 Canada * * *
* * * * * *
**********************************************************************
From belove@sover.netWed Nov 29 15:35:46 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 07:37:32 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: the Montana Bahais
Thanks Burl about the montana Bahais.
I had wondered. There was a humorous essay in the Altanta Magazine,
or Harpers maybe in 1995 about the "head of the Bahai faith
announcing the end of the world" and I wondered what the hell that
was about.
Belove
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 11/29/95
Time: 07:37:32
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlWed Nov 29 15:36:54 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 19:26:27 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: What's T good for?
Jim has a rather low opinion of the functionality of the
critical function which is so abundantly exercised here, and
also of the various reforms which have been suggested
(although we are still waiting to hear the details of his own
proposed alternatives). Specifically he asks how "the recent
pattern of discourse here on this list affecting the hearts
and minds of the believers?" If I may offer a sample of
one, it has affected me by making me resolve to apply the
principles of the *Universal* declaration of human rights in
the institutions with which I am involved. Perhaps others
may be moved to do the same, and the number of things
which people have to 'get over' in the next generation might
be a little lower. Perhaps some local assemblies might even
endorse the declaration of human rights as assembly policy?
Remember the nuclear-free zone campaign? It started with
cities and villages and led to national and even continent-
wide and effective bans. As of now I am a one-man human
rights violation free zone. One has to start somewhere, and
it is clear that such an initiative is unlikely to come from
the top in our community.
I don't see any chance that the wrongs of the past will just
go away unless 1) there is structural institutional change to
ensure they do not recur, at which point we will not need
to use the various 'incidents' as concrete evidence of the
need for such change, and 2) there is something like a truth
commission to redress past wrongs. Apologies might be in
order, explanation certainly. I don't believe that a nation or
a community can achieve lasting and effective unity by
forgetting their past. And not all of these 'incidents' are
remotely distant anyway - would that it were so.
Anyway, I think the ball's in Jim's court - just HOW could
the list 'be used to effect change'? To 'plan' what? to
'connect and inspire' for what purpose? And once the details
are out, why should this occur on Talisman specifically? I
for one subscribe for the titbits of Middle-eastern studies
and Baha'i theology that come our way, and the dead-
duckedness or otherwise of the American community may
not be a pressing concern for subscribers from other parts
of the world.
Sen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen McGlinn ph: 31-43-216854
Andre Severinweg 47 email: Sen.McGlinn@RL.RuLimburg.NL
6214 PL Maastricht, the Netherlands
***
When, however, thou dost contemplate the innermost essence of things,
and the individuality of each,
thou wilt behold the signs of thy Lord's mercy . . ."
------------------------------------------------------------------------\'1a
From osborndo@pilot.msu.eduWed Nov 29 15:37:15 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:33:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Zhang Osborn
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Institutions/Reform/Trust/Love
Allah'u'abha! Thanks to all for the different points of view, quotes, etc.
on the Baha'i institutions. One dimension that should not be forgotten is
that of love. Building trust, asking questions, discussing reforms,
understanding the nature and future of the administrative order are all
essential, but without striving to love the institutions (as well as each
other), whatever the imperfections, where will the energy come from for
growth and maturation of the institutions and the community as a whole?
I do not mean to overlook that there are some people who feel hurt and
believe that injustice has been done--only to reiterate what most already
know better than I, but which should not escape mention: that love is
possible and necessary even in these situations ... love of justice and
love for the Divinely-ordained institutions.
Don Osborn osborndo@pilot.msu.edu
--
From ZIBA@msn.comWed Nov 29 15:48:20 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 19:13:10 UT
From: Brian Armstrong
To: 'Talisman'
Subject: Bio ...
Allah'u'Abha.
After being on Talisman for about three months now as merely an observer, I
somewhat hestatingly upload my Bio. Hesitatingly, because of all the
confusion and sorrow that I see propogated here and less and less deepening
on our own Faith and more concentration on the Faiths of others; although I
do see this study as necessary I feel there is a large detraction from the
real serious studies of our Faith.
I am a Professional in the Computer Industry with various credentials to back
that up. I currently am employed by the Ministry of Forests of British
Columbia, Canada (no jibes please!) as a Systems Analyst and an Windows NT
Network Administrator, and also have on my off-work hours my own company
called ZBA International (pronounced Zee-bah), which provides many services
of which software development and Consulting/Servicing are the primary
business functions.
I have been a Baha'i since 1991, and before that was not as much practicing
any one particular Religion as I was studying the Esoteric and Mystical
ideologies such as the Theosophists, and was mostly a youth who enjoyed going
to places spiritually since I could not afford to go there physically. I
have studied many languages, including Greek, Hebrew, Arabic/Farsi,
Hieroglyphic Egyptian, Sumerian, Coptic, and Latin, with a touch of French,
and a smidget of Mayan. Now, this does not mean I am an expert in any of
them, nor do I claim to be, it is just an inkling of where my mind was at
during various stages of my life, and what interests I have had.
I am still battling with learning Farsi, and have the great blessing of being
married to a beautiful, caring, and spiritual women who just happens to be
Persian. Her family heritage hearkens back to the time of Shaykh Tabarsi,
where her great-great-great-Uncle was one of the Martyrs. Her father also
died at the hands of the Iranian government nearly six years ago, when they
performed the cruel bastinado on him suffering him to live the two weeks
hence in misery, as his nervous system disintegrated, he became paralyzed,
and his lungs collapsed causing him to expire. I am sorry for the graphic
representation but I feel that these events that shape our Baha'i World are
the exact events that guide our Institutions, our communities, and our
spiritual life. The Martyrs surround us and protect us always.
Currently, I am developing software with a fellow Talismanian, and a very
good Friend, Cary Reinstein, that we hope will be a turning point for the
Baha'i' Writings into our digital universe. I have been steadily programming
this software with hopes of having it ready for late winter or early spring
of 1996. It will initially be only for the Microsoft Windows line of
software (i.e. Windows 3.x, Windows 95, and Windows NT), with Unix and
Macintosh development slated for summer and fall of next year. This
information is strictly for information purposes only and is not meant as an
advertisment. We will be soliciting testers next month and in January, to
determine if the product's direction is the right one, and whether the
features can be enhanced or added. We will keep you posted.
It has been disconcerting for me to say the least, and my wife, considering
her family history and her lineage, to have to witness the disintegration of
conversations on Talisman. A list of whose members we were told, were
scholars, counsellors, Auxialary Members and Assistants, members of National
Spiritual Assemblies, and individuals from the World Centre. Many a time I
have been poised on the brink of sending that infamous UNSUBSCRIBE message
only to find a spark of verite, that equiescence of truth, that glimmer of
hope, when my yesteryear studies after a scholarly fashion sat up and took
notice of someone's post. it happens so infrequently that it begs one to
differ whether it is worthwhile getting the 20 or 30 messages a day from this
list (too much for the poor content that surfaces).
If angels weep at hearing people backbite and say nasty and cruel things to
each other, then the angels must be weeping a mighty sorrow at this moment.
I don't claim to be a perfect Baha'i (if there is any in the world today that
can stand in the shadow of 'Abdu'l-Baha, then let them stand), but I do know
when enough is enough. Sure we can debate endlessly over what we feel the
Institutions of the Faith should be doing, should be saying, and should be
writing, but there is one important thing that must be understood - they were
elected in a Baha'i Election by the Baha'i community. They weren't elected
by one individual, or one group of people who reside under the banner of
Baha'i, but who think they are the most spiritual. It is not a question of
who is right or who is wrong, it is a question that the Institutions of the
Faith are the direct descendents of the Guardian, and should be seen as the
light bearer's, the harbingers of truth and not the masterminds of a plot to
discredit or harm Baha'is.
Lately, a few posts have centered on whether or not "Covenant-breaker"
material was being passed around, and whether or not it was wise to read and
comment on it on Talisman or in your own Forums of private or communty
discussion periods. It was was also straight-way rebuked by the Auxialary
board for Protection as being defintely "Covenant-breaker" material and not
fit for Baha'i consumption by any means. What other message is it that you
as Baha'i's are waiting for? Are you indeed awaiting a message from the
august pen of the Universal House of Justice? Is it not sufficient that the
Auxialary Board, a Board that has been established and maintained by the
World Centre, that get's its direction straight from the World Centre, that
draws on the collected and majestic Baha'i teachings of Baha'u'llah,
'Abdu'l-Baha, the Guardian, the Universal House of Justice, and the Hands of
the Cause of God good enough for you? If they make a decision be certain
that there is no private agenda, they have been established to look after the
best interests of the Cause and of all Baha'i's the world over. To me, too
many friendships, to many spirits, are sent wandering farther from the light.
Is the light to bright to handle? Is it that the mirror or truth shows your
own inadequacies, and illuminates the dark shadows and corners of your own
spiritual neglect? I pray for you all.
What happened to the Baha'i World I fell in love with when I first became a
Baha'i. What happened to those stalwhart pioneers, to those Martyrs of
yesteryear, those Knights ... are they all to be forgotten? Have we indeed
turned a mighty corner, and are we liked the Egyptian snake who eats his own
tail?
I for one am ecstatic to be a Baha'i. I want my actions, my example to be a
teaching for my children, for the children of the world. I pray that you all
want the same.
My friends, I am not entertaining accusations this week, nor am I
entertaining a flooded mailbox. My Bio stands as both who I am and what I
stand for. I am a Baha'i. I choose to follow the guidance of the
Institutions of the Faith. If there are individuals who serve on those
Institutions, and influence the decision-making of the Institution to
something that is contrary to Baha'i teaching as outlined in the Writings of
our beloved Baha'u'llah, 'Abdu'l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi or the Universal House
of Justice, then these must be seen as a Protection issue and echoes those
words of Shoghi Effendi that claim we will experience attacks from within. I
pray the Institutions who have experienced this malfunction will embark on a
mission to correct it and pray for guidance in all their decision-making
processes.
May Baha'u'llah guide you and bless your every step!
With Warmest Baha'i Love,
Brian Armstrong.Brian Armstrong,
ZBA International Ent.
From rvh3@columbia.eduWed Nov 29 15:48:57 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 14:39:07 -0500 (EST)
From: Richard Vernon Hollinger
To: belove@sover.net
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: the Montana Bahais
Phillip,
The Montana "Baha'is" to which reference has been made are followers of
Leland Jensen, originally a member of one the groups in New Mexico that
accepted Mason Remey as the second guardian. Jensen left that group,
formed his own "Baha'i" group in a college town in Montana, making vague
but increasingly grandiose claims for himself, most recently culminating
in his claims to be the return of Christ. His teachings follow a trajectory
that is discernible in Mason Remey's later
writings--catasrophism. Remey, since the end of World War II, had been
convinced that there would be a nuclear war that would change the face of
the planet. I have forgotten the date that Remey predicted this would
occur, but he closed is papers until 1995 in part because he thought the
the nuclear conflict would have already taken place by then. Jensen has
predicted the end of the world several times--his followers seem to
believe, like Remey, that the some sites in
the Rocky Mountains would be safe from the forthcoming nuclear war.
Recently, he gave a date for the destruction of New
York City (about a year ago, I think). When the date passed, his
followers asserted that the prediction was *not* a mistake. They were
right of course, New York City was destroyed, but no one noticed.
Richard Hollinger
>From the ruins of New York City
From rvh3@columbia.eduWed Nov 29 15:53:10 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 15:06:06 -0500 (EST)
From: Richard Vernon Hollinger
To: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: MacEoin, Afnan & Hatcher
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995 Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl wrote:
> I think Seena is right - the Maceoin vs Afnan & Hatcher
> debate (a series of attack & reposte articles) did more
> public damage to the Faith than the Hinnels intervention,
> and presumably contributed to the polarized and polemical
> approach which followed. But - correct me if I am wrong -
> aren't Afnan and Hatcher also "Bahai academics"? Their
> intervention was very unfortunate, but can hardly be used
> as an example to show that there should be MORE
> consultation with academics.
I do not believe that either of the authors are academicians in the field
of Middle Eastern Studies, or a related field. I remember seeing a copy
of this piece a few weeks before it was published, when I was a graduate
student in Middle Eastern History at UCLA. Dismayed at
the approach it took, and unaware that it was about to go to press,
I began preparing a written critique that I intended to forward to the
authors. While I was preparing this, I ran into one of the authors at an
ABS Conference. He told me that it had already been typeset--or, at
least, that it was too late to make changes--and, furthemore, that the
article had been reviewed and approved by the Baha'i World Centre. I am
not sure what the latter assertion meant, exactly, since the BWC does not
normally conduct reviews of English-language materials, but it seemed to
me at the time that the author was implying that no revisions in the article
needed to be contemplated.
I cannot believe that anyone in the field of Middle Eastern Studies, or
for that matter any field of history, would have found this article up to
academic standards. The authors, as I recall, tried to respond to
MacEoin's use of primary source materials with reference to *God Passes
By,* while ignoring MacEoin's orientalist approach [Orientalists would
typically attempt to explain all social phenmonon in Islamic societies by
referring to the Qu'ran or other Muslim texts]. MacEoin attempted
to explain events in Babi history by referring to the writings of the Bab,
without providing any evidence that the Babis who participated in these
events were even aware of these writings.
Richard
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduWed Nov 29 15:54:03 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:30:44 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Burl Barer
Cc: alma@indirect.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: anti-Baha'i file
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, Burl Barer wrote:
> These nuts love to also send out press releases claiming that the "Head of
> the Baha'i Faith" insists the world is going to blow up on Tuesday. Of
> course, it doesn't and people think that we Baha'is are nuts, not realizing
> that this joker in Montana is not a Baha'i, let alone the leader of our
> Beloved Faith.
Back in the late '70s or early 80's this group made a similar
announcement. I recall -- it might have been on NPR -- a reporter
visiting Missoula. The leader of the group, Leland Jensen, had declared
that an atomic war was about to happen, and that everybody but his group
would get fried because *his* group had filled their attics with dirt and
pebbles to stop the gamma radiation. You could hear raucous laughter in
the background as their group had a party celebrating that they were
right and protected, and everybody else would soon be toast.
The program ended with the sounds of the party, and the reporter saying,
"So as we leave Leland Jensen with rocks in his attic..."
From osborndo@pilot.msu.eduWed Nov 29 15:54:22 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 15:33:42 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Zhang Osborn
To: Christopher Buck
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Mani & Smith
Christopher Buck wrote:
> In *In Iran* (ed. Peter Smith, Studies in the Babi and Baha'i
> Religions, vol. 3), I argued that Mani really afforded the only
> phenomenological parallel to Baha'u'llah's proclamation as a world
> prophet, since Mani appears to have been the first to unite Semitic
> and Aryan religious systems in both his proclamation and liturgy.
Allah'u'Abha! A Baha'i friend, who is not a religious scholar but has spent
a lot of time with the Writings & talking with people of different religions,
speaks similarly of Joseph Smith ("prophet" of the Mormon faith, who the
Guardian said *might* be considered a "seer" (I don't have the reference))
saying that in a way he provided a "bridge" between the religious systems of
the East and the Americas. I am not that clear on her idea but I wondered
if in regards to "prophethood" (or not) Mani and Smith might be considered
to have had similar stations...
Don Osborn osborndo@pilot.msu.edu
From osborndo@pilot.msu.eduWed Nov 29 16:02:39 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 15:53:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Zhang Osborn
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Sexuality (in part) a vain & idle imagining?
Allah'u'Abha!
To what exent can the concept of "sexuality" be considered a "vain
and idle imagining"? Let me clarify that I am not asking if "sexuality"
per se is a vain and idle imagining (since at its core it refers to that
aspect of human personality relating to sex, and it has many legitimate
uses) nor am I trying to downplay or deny the role of sex in human
existence. Rather I am asking what parts of this concept--which seems
to have come to prominence in public discourse and been expanded in the
last two or three decades--can be considered distractions from a more
whole and healthy personal development (physical, intellectual, social,
and spiritual). My concern is with the social construct of "sexuality"
in the contemporary West which focuses on sexual activity as an end in
itself or at least an indispensable part of personal growth and
fulfillment (ultimately drawing our sight to "things below" as the
Writings counsel us not to do).
This question occurred to me last spring when I heard on NPR a promo
for a series on "sexuality" in which a woman spoke in very strong terms
about how important she felt her "sexuality" to be. My first reaction
was to wonder about the seemingly ideological fervor of her statement,
then I began to wonder if in the West "sexuality," or at least fixation
on it, IS a sort of ideology.
Anyway, the distinction I am thinking about is something like that
between "sane and intelligent patriotism" and "nationalism." Currently
popular notions of and approaches to "sexuality" in the West seem to go to
extremes like the latter.
Don Osborn osborndo@pilot.msu.edu
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduWed Nov 29 16:02:50 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:55:55 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Richard Vernon Hollinger
Cc: belove@sover.net, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: the Montana Bahais
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, Richard Vernon Hollinger wrote:
> writings--catasrophism. Remey, since the end of World War II, had been
> convinced that there would be a nuclear war that would change the face of
> the planet. I have forgotten the date that Remey predicted this would
> occur...
In one published document, he said it would occur around April, 1963.
How grievous a slam at the House of Justice he was so jealous of.
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduWed Nov 29 16:03:16 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:38:20 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Juan R Cole
Subject: And rugged good looks
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, Juan R Cole wrote:
> Brent: While we're on the subject of important contributions, I want to
> express my gratitude publicly to you for your engaged openness,
> moderation of tone, intelligent argumentation with careful use of sources,
> and profound sincerity of belief.
Love
Brent
From MBOYER%UKANVM.BitNet@pucc.PRINCETON.EDUWed Nov 29 23:40:35 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 14:31:36 CST
From: Milissa
To: Maziar Ostovar
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: sex and shame in the Kitab-i-Aqdas
Hi Maziar--
I wish I could answer the concerns you raised in this post but I admit to
having some of the same concerns as you, and don't really know what to make
of them.
However, a couple of things seem to really stand out to me. First, it appears
that in order to "get caught" one would have to be violating the laws regarding
sex in a blatant way. Otherwise, the Assembly would have to spy on people to
know if they are breaking any Baha'i Law. However, blatant seems to have its
own problems....obviously if you are caught doing it in the park or become a
porno star you are breaking a Baha'i Law. On the other hand, what if a teenage
couple make a mistake and the girl ends up pregnant. Well it would be obvious
that she and her bf had broken the Law, although technically the act was not
blatant, even though the result (pregnancy) is. It is in this kind of
situation that I am most concerned....since she is pregnant she can't claim
she didn't have sex (it worked for Mary but nobody else!) but lets say she
wanted to protect the father of the child, for whatever reasons, and would
not give out his identity (ala Scarlett Letter). Do we force her to tell or
give a DNA test so we can hunt him down? Can the punishment for adultery be
imposed on only one of the two parties involved? And then there is that virgin-
ity law in the Aqdas where your husband can claim you weren't a virgin and get
rid of you. Would you then be punished twice, having the adultery penalty
imposed after your new husband has dumped you? It seems that God has a double
standard, according to some Baha'is, and thinks chastity is more important for
women than for men....see the introductory book by Ferraby as an example.
On the other hand, it could be worse. A fine is definitely not as bad as 100
lashes!
Sincerely,
Milissa Boyer
mboyer@ukanvm.cc.ukans.edu
From chris@c-nelson.demon.co.ukWed Nov 29 23:41:24 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 17:44:47 +0000
From: Chris Nelson
To: belove@sover.net
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Militant Naivity vs Sombre Cynicism
Dear Philip and Talismanians,
After spending the younger years of my life as an angry cynic, sick
at heart at not being able to trust anyone or any thing in the world
it was a relief to fall into the arms of the Bahai Faith.
How much are we to trust the institutions and other Bahai's? To
return to cynicism would hardly benifit individuals, but obviously
blind faith in human beings is the wrong path also.
I have heard that the Sufi's had a saying that went something like:
"Freedom is the absence of choice."
Wouldn't it be wonderful to be able to trust totally?!!
Chris.
> I have many friends amoung the Friends who would have not read the
> posting because someone "told her not to. "they told us not to and so
> I didn't." and it comes across to me with an air of "truer devotion
> than thou. Here is how I handled it, here is how it should be
> handled, let this be an example to you."
>
> But it is not an example I would choose to follow.
> Brent, I think it was, pointed out that his preferred reading was
> "advised us against." I can live with that.
>
> And that made clear to me a certain dimension of Fundamentalism. I
> called it,"militant Naivete."
> "When you've been a Bahai as long as I have, then you'll understand
> better." The more I think about this sentence, the more monstrous it
> becomes.
/One World
/One People
/One Family
Bahai
From snoopy@skipper.physics.sunysb.eduWed Nov 29 23:42:00 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 16:55:42 -0500 (EST)
From: Stephen Johnson
To: Christopher Buck
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu, Christopher Buck
Subject: Re: Baha'i Peer Review
Christopher,
Allah'u'Abha.
Always enjoy your thoughts friend.
I am very intruiged by your proposals for peer review and, in general and
with limited experience, agree with many of your assertions. However, I
would like to kindly disagree with the following:
> One further proposal: I reiterate my proposal that, under a
> Baha'i peer review system, a Baha'i academic who passes formal
> review three times ought to receive the confidence of the system in
> being exempted from further review.
Regardless of a person's scholarly prowess, there tend to be articles which
do not live up to a high standard even in the most renowned scholars. I
take my experience mostly from a physics standpoint where I have \
\
knowledge of fine physicists whose work on a particular topic did not
stand under scholastic scrutiny. Peer review in general sounds good, but
I object to a type of 'review tenure'.
Thank you though for your well thought out suggestion. Has an official
proposal ever been drafted for further thought from the Universal House
of Justice?
stephen johnson
From nima@unm.eduWed Nov 29 23:44:43 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 15:15:04 -0700 (MST)
From: Sadra
To: TLCULHANE@aol.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: neoplatonism pt 2
My most dearest saintly soul-brother, Terry--
Shabestari's Gulshan-i rAz has been translated a couple of times. The
translations aren't all that great, though. But you'll be happy to know
that the Paulist Press, Classics of Western Spirituality series will be
putting out a brand new translation of Mahmud Shabistari's _Rose Garden
of Mysteries_ by Seyyed Hossein Nasr sometime in the next year or so
together with an anthology volume of early Sufi texts by Michael Sells.
Terry jan, I seem to have a different edition of the Gleanings from you -
could you please give the number of the specific gleaning you're
referring to. Thanx!
> Now if Avicenna identifies the Active Intellect with the Angel Gabriel
> with the Source of Revelation would it not be safe to say that I can
> identitfy the "Maiden " with the Active Intellect as the Source of Revelation
> ? A further fascinating tidbit along this line is the ancient Babylonian
> goddess Ishtar. She is the lawgiver and judge as well as the god of love . a
> la Baha u llah in Epistle speaking as the "lawgiver " and " truth seeker
> mystic " .
Sure, I don't see why you can't identify the Angel of Revelation, the
Maiden, with the Active Intellect (al-aql al-fa''al) - I do! Both Avicenna &
Suhrawardi identify it in different ways - see for instance Corbin's
translation of the text and commentary on Hayy ibn Yaqzan in Avicenna and
the Visionary Recital. The Divine Feminine theophanic symbol shows up all
over the place - sometimes in unexpected places. I particularly like the
way it's discussed in Vedanta as the pivotal, receptive nature of the
Divinity. In Tantra it is called the archetypal yoni; in the Tao, the
yang aspect of existence. I seem to recall Meister Eckhart saying
something to the effect that the unmanifested nature of the Godhead in
the the station of revealed ipseity (seems kinda paradoxical, no? "the
unmanifested Godhead as manifested ipseity") is feminine and that the
"uncreated intellect," the uncreated spark in the soul (what he also
dubbs in its active manifestational mode as "the birth of the Son in the
soul") as being feminine in its relation to the Essence - the logos in
Eckhart is also feminine btw.
On a somewhat unrelated note: Frithjof Schuon (known by his disciples as
Shaykh Issa Nureddin al-Alawi), the current hierophant of the
perennialist school, is head of a Sufi Order, the Tariqa Maryamiyya (The
way or Order of Mary), that exclusively emphasizes the Divine Feminine -
for those interested, Frithjof Schuon traces his lineage through the
Algerian Alawi branch of the Shadhilliyyah Order; his Sufi Shaykh was the
late Shaykh Ahmad al-Alawi, the subject of Martin Lings' book, _A Sufi
Saint of the Twentieth Century_.
> Suhrawardi - Could you elaborate a little on the essence /existence issue
> which you said Mulla Sadra reverses ?
The subject of Universals is a very important yet complicated issue in
both Islamic and Western Medieval philosophy - the Scholastics ended up
getting most of their propositions condemned as heresy
by an ecclesiastical council in the 13th/early 14th century. As far as
the Master of Illumination goes he held that the quiddities/haeccities (if
I'm understanding him correctly - John can help out here) are
manifestations of the Platonic forms, the Lord of the Species, and
are thus primary. The that-ness (mahiyyah) of an entity as opposed to its
such-ness or being (wujud) comes first than its existence, although this
dichotomy is a mental abstraction and the process of existentiation and
entification occur simultaneously - John what does Suhrawardi say about
this in the Talwihat and Muqawwamat? Mulla Sadra holds the very opposite
formulation: Being (wujud) is primary and the essences/quiddities are the
non-existent (in the sense that they do not maintain essential existence)
facets of the One Being in His vertical levels of Self-Manifestation. For
Mulla Sadra and Ibn `Arabi there are 2 aspects to the quiddities: 1. as
the immutable entites (a'yan ath-thabita) "...that have not tasted the
smell of existence..," the Platonic Forms (kinda, but not quite), and 2. the
actual things as they exist here as specificied individualities.
Suhrawardi's position is known as the asalat al-mahiyyah (primacy of
essence); that of Mulla Sadra, asalat al-wujud (the primacy of
being/existence). Btw, Shaykh Ahmad Ahsai seems to have held the primacy
of both essence and existence - at least that's what Izutsu says about
him in his _Concept and Reality of Existence_. There's a very valuable
article authored by Seyyed Hossein Nasr I encourage you to read on the
history of Universals in Muslim thought: Existence (wujud) and Quiddity
(mahiyyah) in Islamic Philosophy, International Philosophical Quarterly,
vol. xxix, no. 4, issue no. 116 (December 1989), pp. 409-428.
> Also you mentioned a similarity in the roor for "Ishraq" and " Mashriq "
> . If I understood correctly then the "house" the dawning point is intimately
> connected to "illumination " or the "enlightenment" Juan is referring to in
> his Zen comments .
I know exactly what you're hinting at and I totally agree. The word
Mashriq'ul-adhkar sounds awfully Ishraqi to me too. One way I've been
rendering the word lately is "The Remembrance (adhkar, from dhikr) of the
Dawning Light of the Orient" (Mashriq, from sharq - the east)" (the Aurora
Consurgens Corbin can't seem to stop talking about in all his studies on
Suhrawardi). The word constantly invokes images of Mt. QAf or
nA-kojA-AbAd (no-where-land) as well as reminding me a lot of the
conclusion to the Shaykh al-Ishraq's important mystico-symbolic recital,
Qissat Qurbat al-Qarbiyyah (The Tale of the the Occidental Exile).
Allow me to get on a Coomaraswamyian tangent. The
Mashriq'ul-adhkar of Baha'u'llah represents the sacredotium that
"orients" its subject towards the orient of being, the cosmic North
(nA-kojA-AbAd), represented by BAHA"U"LLAH and the Maiden respectivelly.
This sacred space created by the Temple represents the celestial body of the
Manifestation Himself, the Haykal-i Mubarak, and is analogous to the
Church representing the Body of Christ in Christianity (although this is
usually associated with the sacraments), the stupas the Buddha-nature,
the Ka'aba the various modes of God's manifestations (tajjaliyat), the
prophets and the primordial (hanifi) religion, and the Hogan of the
Native American Navajo people, the cosmological six directions of being
(north, south, east, west, right and left) the apex of which represents
the Great Spirit - symbolized by an Eagle. If you haven't already, you
should read Titus Burckhardt's _Sacred Art East & West_ Perennial Books
(1987).
Another side note: in his other book, _Sienna: City on a Hill_, Burckhart
compares a 10th century Gothic Cathedral to a Romanesque Church of a
couple of centuries later. In the Gothic, there are hardly any
anthropomorphic figerines (sp?) or sculptures inside the interior of the
Cathedral. But there these light niches throughout the building that were
structured such that at sunrise and sunset you get a fascinating
light-show of various vertical leveled order of lights harmoniously
cadencing one upon the other - sound familiar. Well, the niches were
strategically placed so as to get a Neoplatonic emanation scheme effect.
In the Romanesque and Rennaisance structures all of this is missing.
> Back to * The Presence of Being * - I am still *tasting* this one wow
> ! . How does this relate to essence / existence ? Since I talked your ear
> off this week end perhaps you will indulge me and talk mine off on this
> subject . As I mentioned i am trying to make sense of my experiences and as
> Juan noted we lack a " Pir" I must rely on some of the philosophers/
> theosophers to help me sort this out . In the imaginal world if it is
> related to Plato's forms- would the pure intelligences be similar to the
> "Names " or forms of my Lord/ Being ? Perhaps my experince has something to
> do with that ?
Al-hadara'l wujudiyyah (The Presence of Being) or fi hudur [or
muhadara(???)] lil-wujudiyyah (In the Presence of Being) (is this
grammatically/syntactically (sp?) a correct construction - John, Juan?)
undoubtedly has a lot to do with the existence/essence question. The Five
Divine Presences (al-hadarat'ul illahiyata'al khams), for instance, are
according to the school of Ibn `Arabi the various stages which things
move more and more from the states of subtlety (jabarut & malakut) to
concrete materialization in this world and back up again after they've
fully descended, ad infinitum; each being moves down in an arc of
descent and an ascent back towards progressively more sophisticated
states of being, culminating with the Perfect Man - this is Mulla Sadra's
theory of transubstantial movement (harakat jowharriyah).
Terry, you should read the Seven Valleys in conjunction with Ibn
`Arabi's _Journey to the Lord of Power_ and whatever text you can get your
hands on which specifically discusses the ahwal al-murid (the states of
the seeker on the path). Be eclectic and syncretistic - why not?!?! I agree
with Baha'u'llah and Juan that the time for Shaykhs, Gurus and Pirs is
over in this day and age. Once upon a time it played an important role,
but now it is for the most part redundant and can even prove
counterproductive for a truly sincere, aspiring seeker - remember I was
thrown out of a khanaqah here Albq earlier this year because the murshid
found out I'm a Baha'i. The experiences you've recounted to me are so
profound and powerful in nature that I will not do them the injustice of
my limited exegesis. Personally, I believe you've experienced a Baha'i
form of annihilation (fana). Can't say the same about myself, though! I'm
still stuck in the Valley of Knowledge :)
Regards,
Nima
---
O God, cause us to see things as they really are - Hadith
"In the mirror of their minds, the forms of transcendent realities are
reflected, and the lamp of their inner vision derives its light from the
Sun of Universal Knowledge" - Secret of Divine Civilization
From s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.eduWed Nov 29 23:46:02 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 17:01:10 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: Appeals to the Universal House of Justice
Dear Friends,
Whie stories of the actions of NSAs with regards to
individuals have been shared, I am wondering about the
result of the consequent appeals to the Universal House of
Justice?
A while ago one Talismanian shared how he was told, while
en route to Haifa, that he could not go on pilgrimage. He
immediately appealed the decision and was granted a 3-day
visit.
regards,
sAmAn
From dan_orey@qmbridge.ccs.csus.eduWed Nov 29 23:46:38 1995
Date: 29 Nov 95 15:05:07 U
From: Dan Orey
To: DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Response to Daniel
Reply to: RE>Response to Daniel
Quanta gets a gold star for loving honesty..... here goes (again my thoughts)
.......
Nature nurture thing is a toughy, I can say that I was nurtured to be a
straight man and I was raised in a straight family - Presbyterians (God's
frozen people). No one in the right mind chooses their orientation, at least I
think the letter agrees with that. Think about it, why would some one CHOOSE to
not have any human rights? For sex, please, it has never been THAT good.... at
least for me. It is unfortunate that the term homosexual is used, I am more of
a homosocial - sex has very little to do with my life, and is why I say that
the letter / teachings do not decribe my reality, nor that of my friends.
Rock Hudson is an interesting story - it is a classic example of how homophia
and lying kills. If a person can be honest and open - as straight people can -
they tend not to delve into the dark side. When your relationship is respected,
and honored, you do not have to hide - you can share things about your evening
at home, your kids, your family - many gay folsk can not do that. When you do
not have to hide and things are in the open, you dothings that are bad for
you...... gay people are no more or less scandalous than straights (this is
homophobic - witness soap operas, and most movies, books, and the like - most
of it is straight "porn".
Would the Homosexual community and Hollywood be just as eager to help victims
of Aids if there were no effects on gay community? - yes, the evidence is in
the civil rights marches of years ago - they were well supported by many gay
folks - and staffed by many in the gay & hollywood (how did these two groups
get lumped togther?) communities. The AIDS pandemic its mostly a straight
people thing world wide (would the good people in Africa like to share some
stats?).
lovingly back at cha with a big hug - Daniel (silence = death) Orey
From cbuck@ccs.carleton.caWed Nov 29 23:47:31 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 18:41:01 EST
From: Christopher Buck
To: Stephen Johnson
Cc: cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca, Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Baha'i Peer Review
Stephen Johnson writes:
______________________
Thank you though for your well thought out suggestion. Has an official
proposal ever been drafted for further thought from the Universal House
of Justice?
______________________
No. But I encourage further discussion of the proposal. If
more discussion encourages an individual such as yourself to draft
a letter to the Universal House of Justice, the idea could then be
formally presented and considered.
Baha'i review poses certain difficulties for Baha'i academics.
One reason why there is no *imprimatur* on my book *Symbol & Secret*
is that its academic standing could be seriously compromised in the
eyes of non-Baha'i academics.
Therefore, the concern you've rightly expressed for accuracy
could end up being rather moot in the case of academic writing. Of
what value is a perfectly *accurate* book if no academician reads it?
My proposal that Baha'i review of academic work be formally
conducted as academic peer review at least lessens the embarassment
and possible discrediting of a Baha'i-authored academic work should
Baha'i review become an issue.
The second part of the proposal--that the Baha'i review system
exempt a Baha'i academic from review after three (or, five, or some
other finite number) of publications--is, after all, in the interests
of the Faith as well. Let me explain why.
The Universal House of Justice has, on several occasions,
stressed the importance of Baha'i scholarship. If review is
antithetical to this objective, I submit that a compromise be
negotiated in order to meet both objectives--accuracy and the
promotion of Baha'i academic scholarship.
My proposal endeavors to work within the system. It is a
proposal for reform that brings into relevance other objectives of the
Baha'i Faith. If accuracy were the only objective, perhaps mandatory
review in perpetuity would be justifiable.
Note that I am not even raising issues of academic freedom
here. The review system at some point, I firmly believe, ought to
repose its confidence in the integrity of a Baha'i academic who,
presumably early in his or her career, has risked being scandalized by
non-Baha'i academicians for submitting to Baha'i review. After having
demonstrated fidelity to the Covenant in this way, I think that the
wider interests of the Faith are better met if the goal of accuracy is
coordinated with, even subordinated to, an overarching objective of
furthering knowledge of the Baha'i Faith at the university level.
Thank you for your thoughts on this matter.
Christopher Buck
**********************************************************************
* * * * * *
* * * Christopher Buck Invenire ducere est.
* * * Carleton University * * *
* * * Internet: CBuck@CCS.Carleton.CA * * *
* * * P O Box 77077 * Ottawa, Ontario * K1S 5N2 Canada * * *
* * * * * *
**********************************************************************
From 100725.315@compuserve.comWed Nov 29 23:48:14 1995
Date: 29 Nov 95 18:31:58 EST
From: sabredance <100725.315@compuserve.com>
To: talisman
Subject: re comparing apples to oranges
<>
Linda,
Since you choose to reply to my personal post to you on talisman, i will do the
same, although i did not want to bore other talismanians with this.
There was simply no time for mr Singh to change his tone, because some of the
people here on talisman got over the top by taking a remark of him, directed at
me,
in the wrong way, without consulting me first. Then he had to defend himself.
This all happened during the time John was away, when John came back emotions
had gotten so high already that he hastily decided to get rid of this seemingly
unwanted person. Then, after a long and trying time for mr Sing, in which he
tried to get John answering his polite mails about why he got so suddenly
unsubscribed, without a good time to defend himself, Mr Singh finally got angry
yes and maybe he wrote some mails which you decided to call threatening.
Burl just seems to be more able to cope with Americans than Mr Singh was.
And I still am very angry because of the whole situation, where people who make
terribly false assessments on other peoples character are still able to post and
receive talisman mails and other people who sent very insulting mails full of
F... yous privately are still here and even adored. Not to mention several
threatening telephone calls Mr Singh received from Bahais of the US.
It is time we become much more tolerant. This all started as a storm in a glass
of water and ended in a hurricane, doing great injustice to somebody because of
some cultural misunderstandings, which were not properly examined.
Now, will you also reply to comparing the situation of John and the situation of
the Institutions, or do you want to deny that as well?
Sorry other talismanians, that this subject has come up. I tried to fight it out
with Linda off talisman. I just cannot stand injustice and people hiding behind
each others back. And yes, I *am* very angry.
I always get very angry by displays of intolerance and huge prejudice,
especially when displayed by people (and I am talking in general now, not
necessarily pointing a finger at Linda) who profess to believe in unity in
diversity and love. Our world is getting more and more complex. Come and live in
Amsterdam for a while to experience the difficulties of a multi-racial and
multi-ethnical society, with many many people from completely non-western
background (WestAfricans, North Africans, Central Africans, South Africans,
Vietnamese, Chinese, Japanese, Latin-Americans, some from the jungle, Indians,
Surinamese, Caribean, Eastern Europe, Middle-Easterners) suddenly are picked up
and placed in this big city. This could teach all the prejudiced people some
lessons in tolerance, patience and understanding.
So, now more emotional upset is added to talisman. I am sorry, yet staying
silent would create the impression that I agree with Linda, or be silenced by
her words.
Please try to be more tolerant and patient to each other. I am trying too, very
hard, and I know how difficult it is. I am excellent in the art of fault-finding
and having prejudices!
janine van rooij
amsterdam, the netherlands
From dan_orey@qmbridge.ccs.csus.eduWed Nov 29 23:48:41 1995
Date: 29 Nov 95 15:52:45 U
From: Dan Orey
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: breathing space
Reply to: RE>breathing space
I think it has something to do with our hypothalimises....
- Daniel ( who is really a lesbian in a gay man's body - he likes to ski, ride
mountain bikes, camp, doesn't mind thrid calss busses and hotels in South
America, and has limited decorating taste - that part of the gene is defective
he was told by a dear old gay mentor of his)
From PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.eduWed Nov 29 23:49:17 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 15:52:17 PST8PDT
From: "Eric D. Pierce"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: talisman archives/ Re: Peace by 2000? What is that!
Greetings,
I'm still catching up on last week's talisman messages!
Yes, as stated previously I'm archiving everything that
I get from Talisman (compliments of the taxpayers of the
State of California) here at work.
The only problem I anticipate is that my wife would like me
to accompany her and our 2 year old son to her native land
of Catalunya (Barcelona, Spain) next summer for at least 2
weeks, and I don't know if the email gateway between the
University's internet connection and my department's local
area network/database server will handle huge amounts of
unread mail while I am gone.
The good news is that once we have departed I will be
lighting up a fine Cuban cigar (still illegal in the USA,
so of course I never bring any back through customs)
and contemplating the scenic and tranquil Mediterranean
amidst the banter and bustle of the peoples of the former
Roman Empire. BTW, based on my scanty knowledge of Franco-
Iberian linguistics, there were at least 5 main latin/Iberian
language groups: Castillian, Aragonese, Galician, Portugese,
and Catalan. Basque is not related to any other European
language groups. Catalunya and Aragon were separate kingdoms
until the 1500s. In southeast France, Occital is an intermediate
dialect type similar to Catalan but probably having as many
characteristics similar to the dialects spoken in Provence
as Catalan. Andorra is the only country to have Catalan as
the official language. I greatly enjoyed Juan and Sandy's
comments on language and intercultural issues.
On another topic, I am aghast at realizing that Sherman may
be anti-snow (undoubtedly a result of being nefariously
subjected to counter-antiestablishmentarian mind control
experiments at University of Cal., Santa Cruz), and must have
hatched a plot to subvert the ski-mountaineering auxiliary
of the february '96 Bosch mysticism conference. Or perhaps
less ominously, too many vegetarian tablescraps in the Bosch
dining room may have resulted in Sherman having digestive
eruptions (as reported on the tv show "Sightings", a scholarly
feline wearing a turban has been seen levitating in the Redwood
forests around Bonny Doon) that have disrupted the ozone and
blown the jet stream north thereby bringing on drought
conditions and a negligible snowpack in the Sierra Nevada?
EP
(PierceED@csus.edu)
Engineer of Data Sanitation
> Date sent: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 18:47:52 +1200
> To: dpeden@imul.com (Don Peden), talisman@indiana.edu
> From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston)
> 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.
>
>
>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 15:31:18 -0800
From: an assistant to the Auxiliary Board
To: jrcole@umich.edu
Subject: RE: RE: Re: Baha'i Bill of Rights/criminal code
Dear Juan,
Let me get some peripheral issues out of the way before
getting back to the core issue.
First, Brent's recent posting should serve as adequate
response to your complaint that I've left the Writings of
Baha'u'llah out of the list of items worth consideration.
More important than the content of that list is the order
in which I wrote them. Specifically, it started with the
Universal House of Justice and worked backwards. The
order was purposeful. I'll allow you to consider what
that means in light of Brent's recent article.
Second as to engineers and intellectuals, the whole
analysis smacks of prejudice (not intended, mind you,
but prejudice none the less). I sense a significant
misunderstanding of what it's like to operate as an
engineer. The best engineers (and I have no idea
how to classify the likes of Peter Khan and Adib
Taherzadeh if I'm not allowed to include them here)
have managed to not allow themselves to be limited
by any notions of what "can't be done." Engineering is,
fundamentally, a creative process. At the very core of
this process lies the act of questioning fundamental
assumptions. You can see Peter Khan do this in a
number of his most recent talks.
Note that I've discussed the "best" engineers. It
shouldn't take you a great deal of time to think about
the effects of economic exigencies on the statistics
you cited about political views and membership in
fundamentalist movements and realize how such
broad strokes don't help the point you're trying to
make.
The last peripheral issue is to answer your question
about what I'd do if the Universal House of Justice
ever told me that I should write code in some different
way and in a manner which would indicate that they
didn't understand what I do. Obviously the issues are
complicated and simple answers don't always apply.
However, I don't think my original answer changes
all that much. I still have to question where I'm at
before all else, and that questioning cannot have any
trace of effort to convince myself that I'm right and
the House is wrong. In fact, it should go exactly
the other way around.
In fifty years, the world won't care whether X
wrote decent code or whether X
wrote any code at all. That implies a certain set
of priorities which won't map very will to the kinds
of priorities you might have. However, I still have
to believe that there's some mapping which isn't
completely meaningless.
Now, to the core:
From: Juan R Cole[SMTP:jrcole@umich.edu]
>1) Writing letters to Counsellors and the NSA and the House does not
>work.
I have little doubt that recent efforts haven't produced the result
you have expected. The reasons for this, I believe, lie at the very
heart of this discussion. An increased effort to try to understand
how the House views the issues would, I believe, produce a
different result.
>2) Nothing I have proposed could possibly make things worse.
From the standpoint of the maturation of the institutions, a
process to which the House has repeatedly drawn our attention
in the most strenuous way, the view is certainly not as clear as
your statements would imply. Do your suggestions increase or
decrease the pace at which this maturation occurs? Do they
produce short-term benefits at the expense of long-term well-
being of the community as a whole? Are the problems you've
identified really structural or are they the result of a general
lack of maturity on the part of the institutions involved? These
are questions you've not answered.
Clearly your proposals would reduce the number of mistakes
that occur. But one wonders whether the child needs a walker
when the most important thing is for the child to learn how to
walk.
>In other words, you think Bernstein and Woodward were wrong to report on
>Nixon's wire-tapping, the break-in at Watergate, the dismissal of Labor
>Department statisticians, and the enemies list. Unexamined power
>corrupts absolutely, Rick.
Certainly an unexamined power corrupts absolutely. That isn't
the issue. When we are dealing with cases of administrative rights,
the question isn't whether or not the exercise of authority should
or shouldn't be examined. The question is, upon whom devolves the
responsibility of conducting the examination?
The US government doesn't have a Divinely created, Divinely
guided, infallible institution to conduct that examination. The
Administrative Order of the Baha'i Faith does. That strikes me as
a rather important distinction.
Warmest Regards,
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduThu Nov 30 00:20:28 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 19:25:02 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Goldstar? not a slap?
Dear Dan,
Could you imagine the distance between a goldstar and a slap?
For me it is between the earth and the sun! Your loving response is
only an encouragement to be more honest in my relationships. But,
then again not everyone would be as generous as yourself which does
not matter in the long run anyway. Honesty in and of itself is the
reward without external conditioning. Thanks for understanding.
your loving friend,
quanta...(*_*)
From a003@lehigh.eduThu Nov 30 00:22:14 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 19:34:51 EST
From: a003@lehigh.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Zen/The Baha'i Faith/Angels
For a moment, it seemed a little more than surreal...
I'd down loaded Mr. Cole's article comparing certain principles of
Southern and Northern Zen practices with excerpts from Baha'u'llah's
writings on the subject of --he who knows himself knows God--and taken
the four pages with me to work...we'd just opened a sugary musical called
"The Littlest Angel" for the tourist trade here in Bethlehem,
Pennsylvania.
All the cast running around in white, with their large feathery wings,
and halos above their heads singing:
We give him gifts for it is known,
He'll someday give a gift of His own.
His very life He'll sacrifice,
For eternal life in paradise,
To all who believe in him alone.
(How did a good Baha'i get into a spot like this?)
I noticed as I came into the dressing room one of the Angels reading The
Tibetan Book of the Dead. Another was gluing feathers back onto his wings.
I had ten minutes perhaps before having to go back on so I sat for a
moment to look carefully at Juan's thoughts. Behind me, the angel hot
gluing feathers suddenly yelled "ouch". He burned himself with the glue.
"I must be earning karma points," he said. The other angel responded, "I
don't think it works that way. We can't earn our wings." I turned and
said, "let me read you something..."
So there in Heaven, with the Book of the Dead and Angels all around,
we read of the Moon reflecting in the water and Baha'u'llah.
What's the Baha'i Faith they asked.... Dare I say: "The answer." ?
Angelically yours,
Bill
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
* Phone:610-867-9251 William George Fax:610-867-3169 *
* Theatre Artist *
* 908 E. 5th. St. *
* Bethlehem, Pa 18015 U.S.A. *
*_____________________________________________________________________________*
From B.M.Elsmore@massey.ac.nzThu Nov 30 00:27:03 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 01:18:28 +0000
From: Bronwyn Elsmore
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Introduction
Greetings!
I have followed the debates on Talisman, more or less, for about four
months. Usually less rather than more, as I often delete whole lists
unread when my workload doesn't permit any further input, or when a screen
message reports that memory is dangerously strained.
Though there have been many times when I could have replied, I've held back
till now as I had not introduced myself. But despite the fact you haven't
heard from me before, I have appreciated your insights, empathized with
many of you, both gained strength from and despaired at recognizing
parallels between yours and some of my own experiences as a Baha'i, and
wept with some of you.
Basic bio details -
Bronwyn Elsmore, female - that's for you Americans who don't know the name
Bronwyn which is not unusual in other English-speaking countries but
apparently almost unheard of in USA as I've found on visits. It's a very
common Welsh name.
However, I'm not Welsh, but 5th-generation New Zealander and very proud of
that even though I understand I am not to glory in loving my country - but
we do call it "Gods-own" here!
For many years of my adult life I was a freelance and contract writer,
creative writing tutor, publishing editor, etc. In my own time I still
try to keep up with some personal writing - short stories, plays, articles,
whatever, much of it humour.
My fulltime job is Senior Lecturer in Religious Studies at Massey
University which is in the small city of Palmerston North. Another
explanation for Americans who don't understand the term lecturer (also
found on visits) - a Senior Lecturer is equivalent to your full Professor.
We have a very small department of Religious Studies at this university -
just 3 of us who, in order to offer a full programme (undergraduate to PhD)
each spread ourselves over various teaching areas. The up-side of this is
the variation is good and stimulating, the down-side is it means we don't
have the luxury (?) of specializing. So while my current teaching areas are
Hinduism, Islam, Chinese and Japanese religion, women in all religions, all
religions as they're practised in NZ, prophecy and prophetic movements,
religion in current issues, consequently I wouldn't call myself expert in
any. The only area in which I suppose I could claim the designation world
expert would be in NZ Maori religious movements which was my own graduate
area of research for Masters and PhD, and two of my 4 books are on that
topic.
My 5th book went to the printer yesterday, hence my giving myself a little
time to indulge myself with such pursuits today. Title: "Creedism -
Religious Prejudice in New Zealand", which is the report of a study I
conducted on that topic. I hope my sixth may be a collection of my
short-stories - I do like to keep a balance of academic and creative in my
life. The other two books are children's books! When possible I try to get
my interests to coincide - in January I'm presenting a paper on "Religion
in the Theatre" at a conference in Sydney, Australia.
I have been a Baha'i for 25 years.
In July of this year I was cruising in the Java sea and visiting exotic
places such as Borobudur (I also teach Buddhism sometimes) and had the
pleasure to meet an Amercian Baha'i brother and photographer of note, Paul
Slaughter of New Mexico, who told me of Talisman - thanks, Paul, for that
and the photos if you're tuned in.
Now, a request -
In 1996 I have sabbatical leave due and will be off in the second half of
the year to places yet undecided. Does anyone know of any
interesting/relevant conferences that I might be able to include in my
itinerary between July and December? Offers of guest lectures, perhaps?
Paradisiacal places to study at little expense? Any ideas will be
considered - irresistible offers particularly welcomed.
Best wishes to you all.
Bronwyn Elsmore
B.M.Elsmore@massey.ac.nz
From carl@grapevine-sys.comThu Nov 30 00:28:22 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 21:17:18 -0600
From: Carl Hawse
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Back Later
Due to the high volume of email, I've signed off the list. My email program
cannot differentiate easily between talisman mail and other mail--perhaps
our esteemed List Owner could look into LISTSERV options such as digest-mode
or fiddling with the FROM and REPLY-TO headers to separate talisman mail?
Anyway... I'm dedicating the next month to studying web publishing and
revamping my pages. FYI: The list rules are at
http://www.grapevine-sys.com/~carl/talisman.html
and I'm interested in hearing from anyone interested in starting a baha'i
scholarly-type web-zine or otherwise posting stuff on the net. But I need
material in electonic form only.
Much thanks for the drama and excitement! (As well as ever-thoughtful posts
of a more scholarly nature!)
Aside: Has anyone out there seen a great
way to indicate diacriticals and
underdots over the net?
Peace.
------------------------------------
Carl Hawse
carl@grapevine-sys.com
http://www.grapevine-sys.com/~carl
------------------------------------
From belove@sover.netThu Nov 30 00:43:29 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 09:02:11 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: talisman@indiana.edu, 748-9178@mcimail.com
Subject: Group Think
Just came across this interesting list. Seem relevant. The source is
Irving Janis's book :: Victims of Group Thinking: A psychological
Study of Foreign Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Houghton Mifflin,
Boston 1983
Group Think
Signs and indicators
Group members think the group and its members are
invulnerable to dangers
Members create rationalizations to avoid dealing
directly with warnings or threats.
Group members believe their group is moral
Those opposed to the group are perceived in
simplistic, stereotyped ways
Group pressure is put on any member who expresses
doubts or who uestions the grup's arguments or proposals.
Grup members censor their own doubts.
Groupmembers beleive all members are in unanimous
agreement, whether such agreement is stated or not.
Group members emerge whose function it is to guard
the information that gets to other members of the group, especially
when such information may create diversity of opinion.
Consequences
Group limits its discussion to only a small number of
alternative solutions
Group does not re-examine its decisions
Group spends little time discussing why certain
intiial alternatives were rejected.
Group memabers are extremely selective in the
informaiton they consider seriously.
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 11/29/95
Time: 09:02:11
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
From belove@sover.netThu Nov 30 00:43:59 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 23:32:55 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: Chris Nelson
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Militant Naivity vs Sombre Cynicism
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995 17:44:47 +0000 Chris Nelson wrote:
>Dear Philip and Talismanians,
>
>After spending the younger years of my life as an angry cynic, sick
>at heart at not being able to trust anyone or any thing in the world
>"Freedom is the absence of choice."
>
>Wouldn't it be wonderful to be able to trust totally?!!
>
>Chris.
>
Dear Chris, It would be bliss, I'm sure.
What a difficult challenge, to be content with the will of God, the
four valley.
I think , alas, I'm back in the second one, again.
It's a terrain I know quite well, but, I guess not well enough.
In valley one, I remember, the first puncture in my cynicism. That's
the valley in which you have to willing to consider almost any damn
thing because the one thing you know is that you don't know anything
that works any more. And so you are willing to look in places you
would have never looked ( Like an obscure persian religion with odd
names.) ... until I catch a wiff of the beloved one. Then I'm
hooked.
shit!
and in for a lot of pain.
I hate it!
No. Total trust is a long way off. I'm in the fire.
But I don't know how this fits with militant naivete in your
thinking. In my thinking, the people into militant naivete want to
skip over valleys two and three and go straight to four, whatever
they imagine that to be. They tell lies about spiritual realities.
Cynicism is better. I think of that as the shadow side of the valley
of search. You know, rejecting everything and looking, looking,
looking for something.
In the same way, hatred is the shadow side of the valley of love.
Hatred is a kind of profound ambivalence, a clumsy attempt at
detachment.
whatever. Sorry, I'm in a black mood.
Belove (sometimes even the name is a weight)
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 11/29/95
Time: 23:32:56
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
From jrcole@umich.eduThu Nov 30 11:04:57 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 01:24:49 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: short story
Widget Goes to the Moon
I.
Donna religiously watched television shows about uppity working-
class women, such as Roseanne and Grace under Fire. She had
become a grease monkey. She sometimes had to be strict with the other
mechanics, especially if they had too many beers for lunch. She is built
like an armored car, with short red hair and no-nonsense hazel eyes, so
she only had to tell any of them off once. Donna has a special talent at
fixing widgets. Somehow they fit right into the palm of her meaty hand,
and unless they're cracked or something she can readjust one in a second.
That was how she got rich and started watching Frasier and Ellen,
yuppie shows, instead. See, the government has a trillion widgets, and a
lot of them need adjusting, and one of the guys who actually read the
paper saw an ad one Sunday for a GS-13 Widget Engineer and told her about
it. She was nervous about the idea of having to commute into D.C. and no
one in her family had ever been more than a GS-4, so she barely got up
the nerve to apply. But she got the job. Contrary to popular opinion, a
GS-14 can spot a useful team member in a second, since hiring a widget
whiz makes you look good and you might even make GS-15 out of it.
Donna was once taken to a top-secret base where the widgets were
largely out of whack. She took one look around and saw what the problem
was. "Your techtrons were installed 30 years ago, and the vibrations
have loosened all the widgets. Don't you ever tighten them?"
The sleepy sergeant in charge looked at her blankly with his pale
blue eyes. So Donna had all the widgets on all the techtrons tightened,
and it kept the base from going up in a big fireball. After that she was
lured away from the government by a big multinational corporation that
had twice as many widgets as even the government did.
II.
Donna started her own Widget Consultancy firm when she was 40.
She was tired of working for someone else, and had figured out that you
make the real money by owning a business, not by taking a salary from one.
One of her first jobs was a contract with the First Church of
Widgets. They had church-owned facilities and had noticed that the
techtrons had started sputtering.
Donna came in with her team and took a look around. "I can tell
you what the problem is," she said.
The Priest of Widgets raised one hairy eyebrow, as though a
caterpillar moved up his brow.
"These techtrons were installed 50 years ago and the vibrations
have loosened the widgets. If they're not fixed quick, this place is
going to look like the Bikini Islands shortly. Ka-boom!"
"Oh, you're quite mistaken." The priest lowered the errant
eyebrow so that he now had a furry ridge all across his brow. He was one
of those people who, annoyingly, lack any space between their eyebrows.
"You see, the High Priest installed these widgets himself. They can't be
tampered with."
"Look buster." Donna even after she got rich still called people
"buster." "I don't care if the Dalai Lama used his own plumbing wrench to
put those babies in, they've vibrated loose. Then was then, now is now.
They have to be tightened."
The priest blanched. "So." he raised the left side of his lip
slightly. He was one of those people who didn't have to move their whole
lip to accomplish this gesture. "You think you are better than the High
Priest of Widgets. His work was quite perfect, you know."
Donna raised her chin at her work crew, and they went to the
widgets and started tightening them.
"Stop! This is sacrilege!" The priest began ringing the bell
and monks poured onto the shop floor. They subdued the four mechanics
and unceremoniously ushered them off the premises.
Donna and her team returned to the office and called the city
inspection office to warn it of the unsafe conditions. But while she was
hanging up the phone, she felt the floor move and heard what sounded like
a Cape Canaveral blast-off.
"Widget goes to the Moon," she thought to herself. But Sally
Fields couldn't play those roles anymore.
Juan Cole
From dan_orey@qmbridge.ccs.csus.eduThu Nov 30 11:05:33 1995
Date: 29 Nov 95 22:35:16 U
From: Dan Orey
To: SBirkland@aol.com, slynch@interserv.com, DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.edu,
talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: two Goldstars
Reply to: two Goldstars
Quanta, etal,
First thank you all for the love and support, talisman is a real gem at times,
and right now the shine is blinding.....
Quanta asked, "Is my response stereotypical?" - kinda, but your willingness to
listen is not, and I thank you. Gay & lesbian Baha'is feel that there is a "God
said, I beleive it, so that settles it" mentality in the larger community.
Which silences our experience. To some extent the letter tells us that that is
no longer acceptable, and I am grateful.
Equating AIDS and homosexuality, equating homosexuality and pedophilia,
equating homosexuality and promiscuity are just some of the things that are
said to make discussion difficult. When I was growing up, I lived in a little
redneck town in Southern Oregon - where one could not talk of such things - I
grew up with a lot of self-hatred and lothing - because all I learned about
"my secret" was that I was bad, something about "goin to hell", that what I had
was a sickness, etc. Never mind that there is no cure- it is these deep levels
of psychological programing that make for problems later. And there were no
healthy role models to look up to either (I am not a Liberace fan in the
least). I beleive this is what Baha'u'llah is telling me to overcome - that
even tho society and religious community find me repugnant, that I am a good
and decent person, and so are my other gay and lesbian friends - that is also
what I learned when I "consulted" a physician.
The facts seem to suggest that there are more heterosexuals in the world with
AIDs than gay men, that child molestation is done by staight men, that there
are more promiscuous straights than gays...... just a few things that I think
we need to be aware of if we want to rid ourselves of every form of prejudice.
Keep asking, consider this a "gay" fireside - tho one can't be converted
(another stereotype). I wish I could talk to you face to face, because I fear
that this appears strident, I hope not. - regards, Daniel
From cbuck@ccs.carleton.caThu Nov 30 11:07:59 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 1:42:50 EST
From: Christopher Buck
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: Christopher Buck
Subject: Pre-Millennial vs. Post-Millennial Baha'is
In this month's *Atlantic Monthly*, there's an essay by Harvey
Cox on the theology of the Christian right. It's well worth the read.
After reading Cox's essay, it occurred to me that there is possibly
a counterpart in the Baha'i world to a theological controversy that
divides the Christian right into two camps: pre-millennialists and
post-millennialists.
Pre-millennialists see the world as progressively decaying
until Christ comes again. Decadence is upon us. it is
irreversible. there is nothing we can do about it.
Post-millenialists see a necessity for Christians to prepare the
world for the coming of Christ by making the world a better place. This
hastens the advent of the Kingdom.
By way of analogy, I would characterize pre-millennialist
Baha'is as those who view the old world order as decadent and dying.
In a sense, Jesus will come in a cloud, but this time it will be a
mushroom cloud. I myself used to be a pre-millennialist Baha'i. I was
expecting the Calamity in 1984.
Post-millennialist Baha'is focus on the Lesser Peace, while
pre-millennialist Baha'is concentrate more on the Most Great Peace.
Post-millennialist Baha'is favor social activism in an effort to
*hasten the Lesser Peace* (as Shoghi Effendi says in *Messages to America*).
Pre-millennialist Baha'is are typically critical of the
pluralism which post-millennialist Baha'is also favor.
Pre-millennialist Baha'is typically bypass the social agenda of
the Lesser Peace due to a triumphalistic certitude about the Most Great
Peace. Post-millennialist Baha'is differentiate between the
requirements of the Lesser Peace and those of the Most Great Peace.
If my characterizations are too sweeping and polarized, please
blame Harvey Cox, former Presidential candidate Pat Robertson
(post-millennialist), and Hal Lindsey (pre-millennialist), who ran off
with his secretary in an unwitting fulfillment of prophecy.
-- Christopher Buck
**********************************************************************
* * * * * *
* * * Christopher Buck Invenire ducere est.
* * * Carleton University * * *
* * * Internet: CBuck@CCS.Carleton.CA * * *
* * * P O Box 77077 * Ottawa, Ontario * K1S 5N2 Canada * * *
* * * * * *
**********************************************************************
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 23:45:36 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
X-Sender: jrcole@tempest.rs.itd.umich.edu
To:
Subject: Re: Re- Re[2]- Talisman righ
Your wonderful letter touched me. Whether we will be left alone to
be a "loyal opposition" is yet unclear, but I wouldn't put a lot of money
on it.
cheers JRIC
From Alethinos@aol.comThu Nov 30 11:11:54 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 02:07:55 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: What is Talisman good for?
Sen:
I wondered who would be the first out of the chute to start this typical
response. I guess you pulled the duty huh?
In a priv. note you suggested I should tone things down a bit - lower the
volume. Why? So that we can continue to hear the never-ending cry of the
oppressed here? (And please people stop using or ref. to Danny O here - he
and I get along quite well - corresponding in priv. and he has _yet_ to tell
me he feels *oppressed* by the supposed darker undercurrents of my posts.)
Sen, it was a good ploy to suggest that I have not offered anything into
the vacuum I am (again supposedly) creating here. Unfortunately you and I
know full well that I have repeatedly directed our attention (when we are
ref. specifically to America - which is what roughly 98% of the complaining
is about - re: institutions, rights, etc) to the Guardian's writings
concerning America's spiritual destiny. I have, as have others, tried to
engage the list members in a solid discourse in what ails the American Baha'i
community, to analysis our mistakes so that we can correct them and finally,
successfully arise to fulfill the Guardian's vision. You and I have actually
have had som heated and interesting debates on the issues of axiology and
individualism. David Taylor was certainly in on it as was Terry C., and
others.
No Sen, few, if any will be attracted to a *new and improved* Faith. The
vain attempts here to try and dress up this Cause in a fashion that would
find great favor on Oprah or in an interview with Larry King Live on CNN will
not touch the hearts of the masses. No amount of placating to the PC police
will insure the loyalty of an already deeply cynical and spiritual exhuasted
nation. This is already a matter of history in this country - esp. among the
more *liberal* protestant churches - and their numbers have been steadily
declining for the past quarter century. The thing that is sad is that while
these churches are in decline - those that preach intolerance have seen a
dramatic rise in new adherents.
Those that have complained so loudly and insistently here continue to miss
the point. And the point is this: THE problem is not _in_ the institutions.
The solutions are NOT in reforms. DO problems exist? Damn right they do! Is
there a need for significant *maturity* (a term I prefer for various reasons
over that of *reform*)? Absolutely! Will any of this occur? Nope.
It will _not_ occur - not as things stand now. The problems that Juan and
Linda et al continue to lament are not structural in nature. Certainly the
*narrowness* of the present administrative order is a contributor to these
ills. But that narrowness is the outcome of a stagnant, spiritually
unconscious Baha'i community.
These *problems* and miscarriages of justice stem from a national
community that is frozen in fear. It is a community that so closely resembles
America in general that there is no appreciable difference. It is a community
that has all the spiritual instruments and medicines necessary to effect a
radical change in the soul of this nation. And yet it is a community fast
asleep. In ignoring the harsh glare of the difficult Vision the Guardian has
called us to accept it has become a hapless victim of the same spiritual
diseases that plague the greater Community around it. We as Baha'is are in
just as much psychic pain as everyone else. We see it in our so-called
communities, and in the eyes of many of our friends who seem increasingly
disaffected toward the Faith. We see it here on this list.
The way out of this is simple. We stop trying to avoid our destiny and
embrace it. We stop trying to go around, over, under. We stop backing up. We
stop trying to make ourselves like everyone else. The way out is to go
_through_.
The changes that are so desperately needed will come when we arise and
shake the foundations, the false pillars, upon which this nation rests. By
this I do not mean (and I believe Terry C knows this now) we beat those
half-dead horses that are the favorite targets of both liberals on one side
and conservatives on the other. We have spent too long either trying vainly
to pretend that as Baha'is we had no political agenda, or thrusting our
wetted fingers in the air to see which way the socio-cultural winds were
blowing this week. (I guess there is of course the third course, made up of a
not-too-inconsiderable share of the believers here in this country - those
that closely resemble some kind of group frozen in time - blissfully ignorant
of the Reality surrounding them - serious lala land types.)
One last little point. I too love to grab the wonderful things that float
by on this list. Nima and I have a wonderful time with Plato and neoplat.
stuff. I love reading Juan's contributions - they are extremely
thought-provoking esp. when he is tying Islam and the Faith together. When
Buck tosses stuff out here and Burl too I love that. QDL's poems and and the
other wonderful people here make this a great list. I would never want that
to change. But we are not one-dimensional here. I think we can share all this
stuff and still tackle this very large and difficult issue.
And that issue is this: given what the American Baha'i Community needs to
accomplish - considering the role that needs be played by this country in the
unfoldment of the Cause world-wide - and given the manifest failure so far of
the community in arising, HOW BEST can we, at this late hour, help out
brothers and sisters arise? How can we galvanize these descendents of the
dawn-breakers to stand up and truly begin a radical movement that will sweep
across this country and seize the consciousness of America? How do we emulate
the dawn-breakers - given that our constraints are in many ways far greater?
How do we get the community to finally become Revolutionary??
Yes Sen, I have my ideas. But it isn't about my ideas, or yours. It is
about Our ideas. It is about a collective undertaking. It is about forming a
critical mass of friends that are so welded together through a unity of
thought that we literally cause a spiritual chain reaction across this
continent.
You see it is a very difficult task. It is the one given us by the
Guardian. And unfortunately for Juan and Linda and everyone else - it _is_
the only way we are going to ever see the _real_ changes we desire. The
question is, do we have the courage to attempt it?
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 00:49:43 -0700 (MST)
From:
To: Juan R Cole
Subject: Re: short story
Juan--
I wonder how many people are going to get it - let's hope they
actually do get it this time. On a different note, our conversation the
other night got me thinking about posting something on Talisman to the
effect of "Democratic Centralism in the Baha'i community: the Legacy of
the Leninist paradigm in current Administrative praxis." What do you
think? Would this be rocking the proverbial boat a little too strongly on
my part? Wish X wasn't as busy so I could brain-storm something out
with him. Or maybe you'd like to take it up?
From rlg0001@jove.acs.unt.eduThu Nov 30 11:15:59 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 02:13:57 -0600 (CST)
From: Robert Lee Green
To: Dan Orey
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu, SBirkland@aol.com
Subject: Re: A gay Baha'i Responds
Allah'u'abha Daniel,
I love you and welcome you :-), and Baha'u'llah loves you and
welcomes you. What more do you need. :-)
------------------------------------------------
| "O SON OF SPIRIT! |
Robert Green | My first counsel is this: Possess a pure, |
rlg0001 | kindly and radiant heart, that thine may |
@jove.acs.unt.edu | be a sovereignty ancient, imperishable |
| and everlasting." - Baha'u'llah |
------------------------------------------------
From burlb@bmi.netThu Nov 30 11:17:15 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 00:59 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: Alethinos@aol.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: What is Talisman good for?
Jim Harrison noted about the American Baha'i community:
>. It is a community that so closely resembles
>America in general that there is no appreciable difference. It is a community
>that has all the spiritual instruments and medicines necessary to effect a
>radical change in the soul of this nation. And yet it is a community fast
>asleep. In ignoring the harsh glare of the difficult Vision the Guardian has
>called us to accept it has become a hapless victim of the same spiritual
>diseases that plague the greater Community around it.
Burl, fresh from lovingly browbeating the assembled multitude at Menucha
with his vastly entertaining version of The Destiny of America, shares this:
The primary responsibility of the American Baha'is is to "weed out, by every
means in their power those faults, habits, and tendencies which they have
inherited from their own nation....and to cultivate those distinctive
qualities and characteristics so indispensable to their effective
participation in the great redemptive work of the Faith" (Advent of Divine
Justice p.17)
Shoghi Effendi further explained that it is this "weeding out" process that
will enable us to assist in the eradication of those negative tendencies
fromthe hearts of our fellow countrymen. I would like to once again draw
your attention to the 3 spiritual prerequisites which the Guardian stated
"constitute the bedrock on which the security of all teaching plans...would
rest:
1. a high sense of moral rectitude in social and *administrative* activities
(this is the antidote to political corruption)
2. Complete freedom from prejudice (this is the antidote to the cancer of
prejudice eating at the heart of America)
3. a chaste and holy life (this is the antidote to the moral laxity
corrupting the life of America)
each of these three "treatments" is the inversion of the "illness" --
replace corruption with rectitude; remove prejudice, improve morals.
As this is a weeding process, it takes effort. It might make your back sore,
your limbs ache. I hate yard work. My wife loves yard work. She says look
at all the gardens on Mt. Carmel -- Shoghi Effendi must have loved yard work.
I say, "you love yard work, you pull the weeds; I'll admire the flowers."
She says it doesn't work that way on a personal transformative basis. I am
supposed to work on me and it will have an effect on others. Hmmm maybe
that's what Shoghi Effendi means when he talks about "genuine love, extreme
patience, true humility, consummate tact, sound initiative, mature wisdom,
and deliberate, persistent and prayerful effort."
I am one of those obsessive compulsive folks who does silly things such as
agree to ride down to Portland this Sunday to some sort of Moral Rearmement
Race Unity Meeting (not a baha'i sponsored event) simply because I will be
in a car for 8 hours with a man who is not a Baha'i who has asked me to
teach him about America's Spiritual Destiny and the Baha'i Faith.
How can I refuse? And I will go to this meeting on Race Unity and it will be
wonderful, although my lower nature says I could be home watching wrestling
(Lex Lugar has gone back to WCW, by the way and the British Bulldog is a bad
guy now and will be going against his brother-in-law, Brett Hart for the
belt. It will tear the family apart - again) . I was planning to stay home
and vegetate, be morally lax and politically corrupt -- then again, going
travel teaching is a good way to get out of doing yard work.
Burl
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzThu Nov 30 11:20:40 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 23:43:41 +1200
From: Robert Johnston
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: dope that I am
Linda,
Dope that I am I lost your address again. However, if you supply it ONE
MORE TIME I will send the photo tomorrow.
Have been feeling really strange about Talisman, and this has been
reflected in a few of my recent letters. Inexcusably obnoxious, I must
admit, especially since Alison and Steve F said so!
Maybe I've got talisburnout! Really I have written sooo much over the past
almost year, and have reached the time to sit back a bit and watch the
flowers grow. Afterall it is summer here..
With rat from a grainsack tired eyes,
Robert.
From j.rooij@rechten.vu.nlThu Nov 30 11:21:05 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 12:15:06 -0100
From: j.rooij@rechten.vu.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Linda is not my enemy!
Dear Talisffolks (sorry Robert, will pay you copyrights!),
I have not read the mail on this list since my angry letter about apples and
oranges, as I receive this list on another account. I am at work at this
moment and do not have access to this account. So I do not know what has
happened. I just want to assure those who are concerned about it that I have
no animosity against anybody. It is possible to be angry at peoples actions,
the thoughts they express and the conclusions they arrive at, like I am with
Linda's, yet at the same time still value them and see their good sides, and
truly love them.
There is a distinction between condemning and disagreeing with the actions of
people and condemning and disagreeing with the being of a person. At least
that is how I feel it. So, I still love you Linda and I think you are a warm-
hearted person. Just a trifle biased, I believe.
much love to all,
janine
janine van rooij
j.rooij@rechten.vu.nl
amsterdam, the netherlands
==============================================================================
Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid
De Boelelaan 1105
1081 HV Amsterdam
Nederland
==============================================================================
From jjensen@welchlink.welch.jhu.eduThu Nov 30 11:21:31 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:00:01 -0500 (EST)
From: Joan Jensen
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: gold stars
Dear Dan,
> Keep asking, consider this a "gay" fireside .
> I wish I could talk to you face to face, because I fear that this
> appears strident, I hope not.
Not the least bit strident, but warm, sincere and honest, and oh so
necessary for me, at least, to learn. So many of my women friends are
gay, and in many ways I can understand them not wanting to have anything
to do with that group of people (men) who rape, plunder, revel in war,
think so linearly and communicate so harshly (lets see.... how many
stereotypes did I miss? Oh yeah, "All men are dogs!") The homophobia
in these United States is somehow gentler on lesbians, which may be why
they have not explained things to me in just the way you are describing
to us here.
So please allow me to ask questions, also.
You mentioned the spiritual anguish and despair, leading to withdrawal,
sometimes suicide, and the sense society gives of being somehow "wrong".
To me this has meaning that I cannot appreciate, in the sense that I
cannot fully walk a mile in yours shoes. Its different from the anguish
someone might feel who was too fat, or too tall, or too black, or too
poor; those external variations not within society's accepted standards
of normal, because we know that this physical body will eventually be
discarded. Its different from the person who lies, steals, cheats, whose
actions are the result of volition. It sounds more like the anguish that
Bud Polk was describing feeling *before* he was diagnosed as bipolar,
except that its society that is saying you are somehow wrong, but it
doesn't necessarily "feel" wrong, which his situation certainly did.
Maybe the closest is what Cary has shared with us, which I appreciate but
again cannot imagine what that is like.
Despite my recognition of negative male characteristics and stereotypes,
I am very attracted to them. I try to imagine what it would feel like
if I were told that this attraction was against the law of God, and that
there was no legitimate sexual way I could act on that attraction.
Please forgive me, please help me to understand how this is different
than what women have been told within the Christian tradition for
generations, which you can understand with your straight-laced Christian
upbringing? Let me speculate that it is somehow less painful for
heterosexual women to be told this than for men, because our sexual
responses are different than mens. I remember reading recently that
men think about sex many more times a day than women (the actual numbers
escape me, but are stunning) as well as other differences regarding
arousal. I am assuming here that you don't have difficulties with the
Baha'i laws regarding chastity... heaven knows I haven't had any for
over three years, since my separation and divorce, and although I'm
restless I also recognize the real possibility that I may *never* have
an outlet for my sexual expression. This law applies equally to both
of us, and I have not heard you saying you had a problem with it.
I've always had the fond and probably naive hope that homosexuality was
a response to society's not allowing a legitimate outlet for the love
that men can feel for one another, and lacking this socially acceptable
outlet, men then begin to think of themselves homosexual because they
have these feelings. The love I feel for women is almost palpable, but
that love has always seemed okay to me, and doesn't evoke a physical
response, so maybe I'm way off base.
Precious Dan, I feel very honored that you are sharing so frankly with
those of us who are struggling to understand. Thank you.
Warmly, Joan
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Joan Jensen
Baltimore, Maryland USA
*******************************************************************
"...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 belove@sover.netThu Nov 30 11:23:45 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 08:03:38 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: I can't do this
Dear Friends,
This for me is the other side of the issue that (I think) Juan, Linda and
others have so valianted crusaded about.
On the one hand there is the argument that we must think for ourselves and
know with our own knowing. (Even though, for our knowing to be true our
hearts must be pure.)
On the other side, with equally compelling reasoning I find this:
On Wed, 29 Nov 95 19:13:10 UT Brian Armstrong wrote:
> Is the light to bright to handle? Is it that the mirror or truth shows
your
>own inadequacies, and illuminates the dark shadows and corners of your own
>spiritual neglect? I pray for you all.
>
>What happened to the Baha'i World I fell in love with when I first became a
>Baha'i. What happened to those stalwhart pioneers, to those Martyrs of
>yesteryear, those Knights ... are they all to be forgotten?
>I for one am ecstatic to be a Baha'i. I want my actions, my example to be
a
>teaching for my children, for the children of the world. I pray that you
all
>want the same.
>
I choose to follow the guidance of the
>Institutions of the Faith. If there are individuals who serve on those
>Institutions, and influence the decision-making of the Institution to
>something that is contrary to Baha'i teaching as outlined in the Writings
of
>our beloved Baha'u'llah, 'Abdu'l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi or the Universal
House
>of Justice, then these must be seen as a Protection issue and echoes those
>words of Shoghi Effendi that claim we will experience attacks from within.
I really envy this kind of steady faith. I think again of the seven valleys
and see that this attitude is farther along than I am. I am not capable at
this time of that kind of trust.I wish I were.
Or I wish I didn't need to make so much noise about how I'm not.
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 11/30/95
Time: 08:03:38
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A. Einstein
From belove@sover.netThu Nov 30 11:23:59 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 07:56:42 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: Robert Johnston
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: dope that I am
On Thu, 30 Nov 1995 23:43:41 +1200 Robert Johnston wrote:
w. Afterall it is summer here..
>
>With rat from a grainsack tired eyes,
>
>Robert.
>
>
Amazing and magical world of Talisman. Frost covers the lower half of
my windows, Snow on the evergreen branches and, unbelievable, the
swans float in the unfrozen corner of the pond, white like snow.
A cold draft pours off the windows into my lap. And it's summer for
you.
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Belove
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 11/30/95
Time: 07:56:42
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A.
Einstein
From lua@sover.netThu Nov 30 11:25:13 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:05:51 -0500
From: LuAnne Hightower
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Group Think, etc.
Dear Philip -
In what way was the Group Think description relevant to talisman? I'm
trying not to take this personally. I don't think of myself or the majority
of folks on this list as doclie sheep in denial of our doubts and questions.
What is the point?
You: "Cynicism is better. I think of that as the shadow side of the valley
of search. You know, rejecting everything and looking, looking,
looking for something."
My experience of cynicism is rather that of being open to nothing, ready to
reject darn near any point of view before I can even hear it. Maybe
skepticism is what you meant?
It might be cold out, but the sky is blue.
Love,
LuAnne
From JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduThu Nov 30 11:26:14 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 10:29:15 EWT
From: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
I have been getting reports of Talisman messages addressed to "undisclosed-recipients".
I suspect it is a glitch in the system, and not a manifestation of some
sinister plot, but I will check with the computer people here.
john walbridge
list owner
From dpeden@imul.comThu Nov 30 11:37:31 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 19:25:47+030
From: Don Peden
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Four Noble Truths
Dear Bruce:
I have not ignored your posting, but I have been studying it and trying to
absorb what it is saying. So, once again, please be patient.
It seems that suffering is very important to the Four truths, and the Five
Groups of Existence. Since it seems to cover everything from conception to
death, and all manner of activities inbetween, it begs the question as to
what the word "suffering" means in Buddha's teachings. It must encompass
more than our usual concept of suffering. This is interesting, because
Baha'u'llah also talks A LOT about suffering. So often the prayers say,
"Suffer me to know Thee". It seems that suffering has a big spiritual value
which is worth exploring more.
Sorrow, Lamentation, Pain, Grief and Dispair seem to be responses to
suffering. Buddha also talks about our wanting to "wish" these responses
and suffering away, and then tells us that not getting to wish them away is
also suffering.
He then talks about our different faculties, and how certain responses are
defined within the faculty used to perceive them. That seems straight
forward on the surface.
The interesting bit comes in when he talks about the functioning (harmonious
functioning) of these faculties are what dictates how perceptive we are, or
what state of consciousness we can achieve. He then spends a long time
talking about each faculty, and the capacity of each faculty, their
inter-relatedness, and that we can not gain consciousness without using all
of them.
What about people whose faculties are impaired? Does that mean that they
are incapable of achieving consciousness? Are there no faculties they
possess which allow them to be spiritually enriched?
The next bit is on Existence, and needs some more time. Mishkin is busy
talking in my ear, and I am not able to give this the consideration it
deserves, so I will continue later.
From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpThu Nov 30 11:55:50 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 19:30:05 JST
From: "Stephen R. Friberg"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: On review
Dear Chris:
I would like to reply on the issue of review. I haven't done so
before because it is such a highly emotional issue for many on
Talisman, and I didn't particularly relish being attacked.
For Baha'i academic publications, or Baha'i studies publications, I
believe that review should generally be required, but that the
review should be of an academic nature. There certainly should not
be waivers for those who have published more than three articles,
in my opinion. To do so would be depart from the nearly universal
standard for publication in scholarly journals: that regular articles
should always be subject to review.
By an academic review, I mean that qualified reviewers should
check manuscripts for significance, accuracy of quotations, errors,
academic integrity (i.e., no ad hominen attacks, etc.) and other
issues. These are quality control steps to make sure that readers'
time is well spent, but they also are the setting of goals and standards.
Should this review include Baha'i editorial review? Should
articles be vetted on the basis of whether or not they are
accurate reflections of the Baha'i teachings? For Baha'i
institution sponsored publications, clearly the present answer
is yes.
Now, for the hard part. What about Baha'is submitting articles
on the Faith to non-Baha'i publications and publishers. Currently,
we are required to submit them for review to the Baha'i institutions.
Suppose a publication is to be sent to an academic journal. Then, it
will be reviewed twice: once by the appropriate Baha'i institution,
and once by the publication. In the best of all possible worlds, this
would not present problems. Baha'i reviewers could help the writers,
and so. But in the best of all possible worlds, it also wouldn't be
necessary.
In the current world, review is established, according to the
House of Justice, as a protection from the unwisdom of the friends.
Anybody who is naive about the friend's unwisdom hasn't been reading
his Talisman. We have an incredible diversity of naivety, all of it
claiming to be the correct interpretation of the Faith's truths.
What are the arguments against this double review? There are several:
- Review prevents an effective Bahai presence in the intellectual,
academic, and scholarly communities of the West. As a result of
the zeal to protect the good name of the Faith, capable, proven
academics are hindered from particating in the intellectual arena.
This has proven especially bothersome, as it has not allowed the
effective countering of scholarly misinformation about the
Faith (MacEoin).
- Review stifles the expression of diverse points of view. Only
a standard and a very cautious discussion of the Faith is allowed,
diversity is suppressed.
- Review is often incompetent or subjective. Reviewers are often
unaware of the nature of academic discourse and how it is carried
out, but unaware that they are unaware.
- Review appears to be censorship. In the eyes of the general
academic and scholarly community, review generates more harm than
it does good, because review for dogmatic accuracy has long been
rejected by the scholarly community.
Certainly, there are more arguments than these, but they are
represented quite well by those listed above.
What emerges when we consider them? Clearly, they take the stance
that competence is being checked in its efforts to proclaim the
Faith in its area of expertise. In other words, the arguments
against review are based on the belief that there is a capable,
responsible, and self-regulating group of scholars wishing to
publish. While they may make mistakes now and then, that will
"come out in the wash", be negated by the nature of the free
market of ideas. The "three reviews and then your free" point
of view is an attempt to establish a criterion as to who is in
this group of competent scholars.
So clearly, there are two stances at work here. One wishes to
protect the good name of the Faith from incompetence within, the
other wants to protect valid intellectual endeavors from
incompetence within. (Both are agreed about the incompetence
within!)
My own views? I am naturally conservative about these issues,
and I certainly don't want certain people's opinions voiced about
as if they were the Baha'i point of view. But, just in the same
way that a mother has to loosen her apron strings and allow her
children a bit of freedom, I think that it is necessary to give
our budding scholars a bit more leeway. Yes, I know that
there will be mistakes. But mistakes, regardless of how much care
is taken, are inevitable and necessary. Is this is to be done where
Baha'i national communities are very immature? Maybe not. Caution
is still very much needed.
BUT! I think that if those with scholarly capabilities and intellectual
leadership potential were viewed as being as sensible, nonextremist,
caring, and without a highly personalized agenda, it would help things
immeasurably.
This is where Talisman enters the picture. It is both an indicator
of the level of maturity of a highly-visible part of the Baha'i
intellectual community, and an arena where we can nurture our
intellectual and emotional maturity. The excitement of fresh
thinking is very much in evidence, but it is also clear that we
are only now emerging from a kind of "name-calling" and "labelling"
phase. This is very encouraging, but we need to continue to move forward.
Concluding, I think that continuing to invest our energies in
Talisman and working to make it shine with a special Baha'i
virtue is one of the best things that we can do to make things
better.
Yours respectfully,
Stephen R. Friberg
From jrcole@umich.eduThu Nov 30 11:56:44 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:35:15 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: widget goes to Indiana
With regard to my little short story, Rob Stockman offered a theological
reply.
>
> It's too bad the high priest of widgets didn't have infallible divine
> guidance; furthermore, it's too bad he didn't believe in consultation;
> and even sadder, that he didn't consult.
> --Rob Stockman
1) Don't you think that you are reading the high priest of widgets in a
literalist way as having a single referent easily identified and defended
with reference to infallible divine guidance? There are some possible
referents for this character of which this would not be true, after all.
:-)
2) I regret to report that the high priest had on numerous occasions
consulted with the monks about the problem, and they had concluded after
consultation that nothing could be touched, and that this consultative
process did not in the end prevent them from being blown to kingdom come.
Apparently the problem is that mere consultation is not a guarantor of
being right. And while the monks usually benefit from pulling behind
their leaders and following the results of consultation, there also has
to be a mechanism for *evaluating the outcomes of consultation* in the
short and the long run, and of *reconsidering decisions and policies that
appear to have flaws.* Otherwise, kablooie.
:-)
cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan
From dpeden@imul.comThu Nov 30 11:58:59 1995
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 20:12:15+030
From: Don Peden
To: Juan R Cole
Subject: Re: talisman rights
Dear Juan:
What is "Panopticon"? It sounds like it has a root in some kind of
"canopy", "covering", umbrella like structure, but it isn't in my
dictionary. Sorry to have to ask.
Your comments, however, do hit cords in me. How would you say the Baha'i
community is doing in its attempts at education? Now that we are forming
schools, it has been our experience that punitive measures, restrictions,
isolation of the "offender" and long "paroles" where the "offender" is
expected to crawl to the authority figures and "beg" to be taken back,
promising ideal behaviour and "shining examplehood" are the chosen ways at
some institutions in which to assist our youth to become "disciplined".
They are then amazed at rebellion within the ranks of students. If they tow
the party line, however, no problem. If they sing and dance, even better.
This helps to raise up a "new race of men". (Luckily, the Canadian N.S.A.
dealt with the institute in question rather thoroughly, but it is still very
scary to think that this is lurking behind the good intents of some rather
prominent educators.) Am I out to lunch on this one?
There is also a form of behaviour modification which was written about in
the early 70's (can't remember who or where; came across it when I was
working in the ed psych department at the University of Alberta), where the
inmate would be deprived of every and all sensory stimulus, right down to a
stool, a plate, clothing, etc. These things would be "earned" back by "good
behaviour". I guess it is what they were hoping to do with the isolation
blocks at alcatraz.
Scary stuff.
Love,
Bev.
>Those who have read Michel Foucault's *Discipline and Punish* might enjoy
>the image of the Panopticon here, Jeremy Bentham's plan for penal
>reform. You see, you not only lock up criminals, but you set up
>observation booths so that they are under constant observation and
>deprived of any privacy at all. They will then not dare do anything
>wrong. And after a while, this fear of doing anything wrong because it
>would be observed will become internalized, and they will go straight.
>Foucault thought that the disciplinary institutions--medical,
>psychiatric, educational, governmental--of modern society themselves
>formed a sort of panopticon. And, of course, Foucault interrogates the
>authority of these institutions to determine right and wrong. The Baha'i
>panopticon is quite extensive.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 20:15:36 -0800
From: an Assistant to the Auxiliary Board
To: jrcole@umich.edu
Subject: RE: Re: Baha'i Bill of Rights/criminal code
Dear Juan,
I'm glad that you're encouraged by my message. I
wish I could say the same about yours:
From: Juan R Cole[SMTP:jrcole@umich.edu]
>As for how I know what I know, the rule in history and in good journalism
>is that if three independent sources confirm an account, you can go with
>it. Also primary documentation is given great weight. You'd be
>surprised what can be found out about contemporary history in a small,
>connected community such as the Faith. So the argument that I "can't
>know" what happened doesn't fly.
First, I don't believe you understand the argument. Regardless of
what you do know, and you may have knowledge of a large number
of facts and documentary evidence, there are two entire classes of
evidence which is quite simply not available to you. The extent and
content of the information which is out of your purview could have
significant impact on the conclusions you've reached. I believe
I've demonstrated this to be the case on more than one occasion
(your conclusion about the salary of the secretary of the National
Spiritual Assembly and your conclusion that the House has not
overturned some unknown decision regarding the voting rights of
the editors of Dialogue are but two examples of this).
In US courts of law, there exists a notion of burden of proof. In order
for one to satisfy a particular burden of proof, it isn't enough to simply
weigh the evidence one has. One also has to consider the weight of
evidence that one does not have (or, to put it differently, the weight
that a particular piece of evidence might have if one were to have it
in one's possession). I have little doubt that you've fulfilled the
first step. I'm inclined to believe that you've given little or no
consideration to that second part.
Secondly, this is only one amongst a number of other points
I've raised. We should, perhaps, come to some common
understanding on this issue, but let's not forget where it falls
in relation to the other points I've raised.
I'm still proofing that letter. I expect to send a copy later on
tonight. (I'm still at work, and the letter is on my computer
at home. I'll have to dial in and send it from home.)
Warmest Regards,
From brburl@mailbag.comThu Nov 30 11:59:18 1995
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 01:06:36 -0600
From: Bruce Burrill
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: The Four Noble Truths
Bev,
> "Four noble truths, please." <
What follows is from Nyanatiloka's translations from the Pali Canon
collected in a work called THE WORD OF THE BUDDHA, long
gone out of copyright. The translation is a little dated, but certainly
still quite useable. Bracketed material is Nyanatiloka's commentary. I'll
get the rest of your msg and what I want say about Dharma tomorrow.
------------------------
D. 16: THUS has it been said by the Buddha, the Enlightened One: It
is through not understanding, not realizing four things, that I,
Disciples, as well as you, had to wander so long through this round of
rebirths. And what are these four things? They are the Noble Truth
of Suffering, the Noble Truth of the Origin of Suffering, the Noble
Truth of the Extinction of Suffering, the Noble Truth of the Path that
leads to the Extinction of Suffering.
S. LVI. 11: As long as the absolutely true knowledge and insight as
regards these Four Noble Truths was not quite clear in me, so long was
I not sure, whether I had won that supreme Enlightenment which is
unsurpassed in all the world with its heavenly beings, evil spirits
and gods, amongst all the hosts of ascetics and priests, heavenly
beings and men. But as soon as the absolutely true knowledge and
insight as regards these Four Noble Truths had become perfectly
clear in me, there arose in me the assurance that I had won that
supreme Enlightenment unsurpassed.
M. 26: And I discovered that-profound truth, so difficult to perceive,
difficult to understand, tranquilizing and sublime, which is not to be
gained by mere reasoning, and is visible only to the wise.
The world, however, is given to pleasure, delighted with pleasure,
enchanted with pleasure. Verily, such beings will hardly understand
the law of conditionality, the Dependent Origination of every thing;
incomprehensible to them will also be the end of all formations, the
forsaking of every substratum of rebirth, the fading away of
craving; detachment, extinction, Nirvana.
THE NOBLE TRUTH OF SUFFERING
D.22: WHAT, now, is the Noble Truth of Suffering?
Birth is suffering; Decay is suffering; Death is suffering;
Sorrow, Lamentation, Pain, Grief, and Despair, are suffering; not to
get what one desires, is suffering; in short: the Five Groups of
Existence are suffering.
What, now, is Birth? The birth of beings belonging to this or that
order of beings, their being born, their conception and springing into
existence, the manifestation of the groups of existence, the arising
of sense activity-this is called Birth.
And what is Decay? The decay of beings belonging to this or that
order of beings; their getting aged, frail, grey, and wrinkled; the
failing of their vital force, the wearing out of the senses-this is
called Decay.
And what is Death? The parting and vanishing of beings out of this
or that order of beings, their destruction, disappearance, death,
the completion of their life-period, dissolution of the groups of
existence, the discarding of the body-this is called Death.
And what is Sorrow? The sorrow arising through this or that loss
or misfortune which one encounters, the worrying oneself, the state of
being alarmed, inward sorrow, inward woe-this is called Sorrow.
And what is Lamentation? Whatsoever, through this or that loss or
misfortune which befalls one, is wail and lament, wailing and
lamenting, the state of woe and lamentation this is called
Lamentation.
And what is Pain? The bodily pain and unpleasantness, the painful
and unpleasant feeling produced by bodily contact-this is called Pain.
And what is Grief? The mental pain and unpleasantness, the painful
and unpleasant feeling produced by mental contact-this is called
Grief.
And what is Despair? Distress and despair arising through this or
that loss or misfortune which one encounters, distressfulness, and
desperation-this is called Despair.
And what is the "suffering of not getting what one desires?" To
beings subject to birth there comes the desire: "O that we were not
subject to birth! O that no new birth was before us!" Subject to
decay, disease, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and
despair, the desire comes to them: "O that we were not subject to
these things! O that these things were not before us!" But this cannot
be got by mere desiring; and not to get what one desires, is
suffering.
THE FIVE GROUPS OF EXISTENCE
And what, in brief, are the Five Groups of Existence? They are
Corporeality, Feeling, Perception, [mental] Formations, and
Consciousness.
M. 109: Any corporeal phenomenon, whether one's own or external,
gross or subtle, lofty or low, far or near, belongs to the Group of
Corporeality; any feeling belongs to the Group of Feeling; any
perception belongs to the Group of Perception; any mental formation
belongs to the Group of Formations; all consciousness belongs to the
Group of Consciousness.
DEPENDENT ORIGINATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS
M. 28: Now, though one's eye be intact, yet if the external forms do
not fall within the field of vision, and no corresponding conjunction
takes place, in that case there occurs no formation of the
corresponding aspect of consciousness. Or, though one eye be intact,
and the external forms fall within the field of vision, yet if no
corresponding conjunction takes place, in that case also there
occurs no formation of the corresponding aspect of consciousness.
If, however, one's eye is intact, and the external forms fall within
the field of vision, and the corresponding conjunction takes place, in
that case there arises the corresponding aspect of consciousness.
M. 38: Hence, I say: the arising of consciousness is dependent upon
conditions; and without these conditions, no consciousness arises. And
upon whatsoever conditions the arising of consciousness is
dependent, after these it is called.
Consciousness whose arising depends on the eye and forms, is
called "eye-consciousness."
Consciousness whose arising depends on the ear and sound, is
called "ear-consciousness."
Consciousness whose arising depends on the olfactory organ and
odors, is called "nose-consciousness."
Consciousness whose arising depends on the tongue and taste, is
called "tongue-consciousness."
Consciousness whose arising depends on the body and bodily contacts,
is called "body-consciousness."
Consciousness whose arising depends on the mind and ideas, is called
"mind-consciousness."
Whatsoever there is of "corporeality" in the consciousness thus
arisen, that belongs to the Group of Corporeality. there is of
"feeling"-bodily ease, pain, joy, sadness, or indifferent
feeling-belongs to the Group of Feeling. Whatsoever there is of
"perception"-visual objects, sounds, odors, tastes, bodily
impressions, or mind objects-belongs to the Group of Perception.
Whatsoever there are of mental "formations" impression, volition,
etc.-belong to the Group of mental Formations. Whatsoever there is
of "consciousness" therein, belongs to the Group of Consciousness.
S. XXXII. 53: And it is impossible that any one can explain the passing
out of one existence, and the entering into a new existence, or the
growth, increase, and development of consciousness, independent of
corporeality, feeling, perception, and mental formations.
THE THREE CHARACTERISTICS OF EXISTENCE
A. III. 134: All formations are "transient"; all formations are "subject
to suffering"; all things are "without a Self-entity."
S.XXII. 59: Corporeality is transient, feeling is transient, perception is
transient, mental formations are transient, consciousness is transient.
And that which is transient, is subject to suffering; and of that
which is transient, and subject to suffering and change, one cannot
rightly say: "This belongs to me; this am I; this is my Self."
Therefore, whatever there be of corporeality, of feeling,
perception, mental formations, or consciousness, whether one's own
or external, whether gross or subtle, lofty or low, far or near, one
should understand, according to reality, and true wisdom: "This does
not belong to me; this am I not; this is not my Self."
S. XXII. 95: Suppose, a man who is not blind, were to behold the
many bubbles on the Ganges as they are driving along; and he should
watch them, and carefully examine them. After carefully examining
them, they will appear to him empty, unreal, and unsubstantial. In
exactly the same way, does the monk behold all the corporeal
phenomena, feelings, perceptions, mental formations, and states of
consciousness-whether they be of the past, or the present, or the future,
far, or near. And he watches them, and examines them carefully; and,
after carefully examining them, they appear to him empty, void, and
without an Self.
S.XXII.29: Whoso delights in corporeality, or feeling, or perception,
or mental formations, or consciousness, he delights in suffering; and
whoso delights in suffering, will not be freed from suffering. Thus I say
Dhp146-8: How can you find delight and mirth,
Where there is burning without end?
In deepest darkness you are wrapped!
Why do you not seek for the light?
Look at this puppet here, well rigged,
A heap of many sores, piled up,
Diseased, and full of greediness,
Unstable, and impermanent!
Devoured by old age is this frame,
A prey of sickness, weak and frail;
To pieces breaks this putrid body,
All life must truly end in death.
THE THREE WARNINGS
A. III 35: Did you never see in the world a man, or a woman, eighty,
ninety, or a hundred years old, frail, crooked as a gable roof, bent
down, resting on crutches, with tottering steps, infirm, youth long since
fled, with broken teeth, grey and scanty hair, or bald-headed,
wrinkled, with blotched limbs? And did the thought never come to you
that also you are subject to decay, that also you cannot escape it?
Did you never see in the world a man, or a woman, who being sick,
afflicted, and grievously ill, and wallowing in his own filth, was
lifted up by some people, and put to bed by others? And did the
thought never come to you that also you are subject to disease, that
also you cannot escape it?
Did you never see in the world the corpse of a man, or a woman, one,
or two, or three days after death, swollen up, blue-black in color,
and full of corruption? And did the thought never come to you that
also you are subject to death, that also you cannot escape it?
SAMSARA, THE WHEEL OF EXISTENCE
S.XV. 3: Inconceivable is the beginning of this Samsara; not to be
discovered is any first beginning of beings, who, obstructed by
ignorance, and ensnared by craving, are hurrying and hastening through
this round of rebirths.
[Samsara-the Wheel of Existence, lit., the "Perpetual
Wandering"-is the name by which is designated the sea of life ever
restlessly heaving up and down, the symbol of this continuous
process of ever again and again being born, growing old, suffering,
and dying. More precisely put: Samsara is the unbroken chain of the
fivefold Khandha-combinations, which, constantly changing from
moment to moment, follow continuously one upon the other through
inconceivable periods of time. Of this Samsara, a single lifetime
constitutes only a vanishingly tiny fraction; hence, to be able to
comprehend the first noble truth, one must let one's gaze rest upon
the Samsara, upon this frightful chain of rebirths, and not merely
upon one single lifetime, which, of course, may be sometimes not
very painful.]
Which do you think is the more: the flood of tears, which weeping
and wailing you have shed upon this long way-hurrying and hastening
through this round of rebirths, united with the undesired, separated
from the desired this, or the waters of the four oceans?
Long time have you suffered the death of father and mother, of sons,
daughters, brothers, and sisters. And whilst you were thus
suffering, you have, verily, shed more tears upon this long way than
there is water in the four oceans.
S.XV 13: Which do you think is the more: the streams of blood that,
through your being beheaded, have flowed upon this long way, or the
waters in the four oceans?
Long time have you been caught as dacoits, or highwaymen, or
adulterers; and, through your being beheaded, verily, more blood has
flowed upon this long way than there is water in the four oceans.
But how is this possible?
Inconceivable is the beginning of this Samsara; not to be discovered
is any first beginning of beings, who, obstructed by ignorance, and
ensnared by craving, are hurrying and hastening through this round
of rebirths.
S. XV. 1: And thus have you long time undergone suffering, undergone
torment, undergone misfortune, and filled the graveyards full; verily,
long enough to be dissatisfied with all the forms of existence, long
enough to turn away, and free yourselves from them all.
SECOND TRUTH
THE NOBLE TRUTH OF THE ORIGIN OF SUFFERING
D. 22: WHAT, now, is the Noble Truth of the Origin of Suffering? It
is that craving which gives rise to fresh rebirth, and, bound up with
pleasure and lust, now here, now there, finds ever fresh delight.
[In the absolute sense, it is no real being, no self-determined,
unchangeable, Ego-entity that is reborn. Moreover, there is nothing
that remains the same even for two consecutive moments; for the Five
Khandhas, or Groups of Existence, are in a state of perpetual
change, of continual dissolution and renewal. They die every moment,
and every moment new ones are born. Hence it follows that there is
no such thing as a real existence, or "being" (Latin esse), but only
as it were an endless process, a continuous change, a "becoming,"
consisting in a "producing," and in a "being produced"; in a
"process of action," and in a "process of reaction," or "rebirth."
This process of perpetual "producing" and "being produced" may
best be compared with an ocean wave. In the case of a wave, there is
not the slightest quantity of water traveling over the surface of
the sea. But the wave structure, that hastens over the surface of
the water, creating the appearance of one and the same mass of
water, is, in reality, nothing but the continuous rising and falling
of continuous, but quite different, masses of water, produced by the
transmission of force generated by the wind. Even so, the Buddha did
not teach that Ego-entities hasten through the ocean of rebirth, but
merely life-waves, which, according to their nature and activities
(good, or evil), manifest themselves here as men, there as animals,
and elsewhere as invisible beings.]
THE THREEFOLD CRAVING
There is the "Sensual Craving," the "Craving for
Eternal-Annihilation." Existence," the "Craving for
Self-Annihilation."
[The "Craving for Eternal Existence," according to the
Visuddhi-Magga, is intimately connected with the so-called
Eternity-Belief," i.e., the belief in an absolute, eternal, Ego-entity
persisting independently of our body.
The Craving for Self-Annihilation is the outcome of the so-called
"Annihilation-Belief," the delusive materialistic notion of an Ego
which is annihilated at death, and which does not stand in any
causal relation with the time before birth or after death.]
But, where does this craving arise and take root? Wherever in the
world there are delightful and pleasurable things, there this
craving arises and takes root. Eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind,
are delightful and pleasurable: there this craving arises and takes
root.
Visual objects, sounds, smells, tastes, bodily impressions, and
mind-objects, are delightful and pleasurable: there this craving
arises and takes root.
Consciousness, sense impression, feeling born of sense impression,
perception, will, craving, thinking, and reflecting, are delightful
and pleasurable: there this craving arises and takes root.
M. 38: If, namely, when perceiving a visual object, a sound, odor,
taste, bodily impression, or a mind object, the object is pleasant, one is
attracted; and if unpleasant, one is repelled.
Thus, whatever kind of "Feeling" one experiences, pleasant,
unpleasant, or indifferent-one approves of, and cherishes the feeling,
and clings to it; and while doing so, lust springs up; but lust for
feelings, means Clinging; and on Clinging, depends the "Process of
Becoming"; on the Process of Becoming (Karma-process), depends
(future) "Birth"; and dependent on Birth, are Decay and Death,
Sorrow, Lamentation, Pain, Grief, and Despair. Thus arises this
whole mass of suffering.
This is called the Noble Truth of the Origin of Suffering.
INHERITANCE OF DEEDS (KARMA)
A. X. 206: For, owners of their deeds (karma) are the beings, heirs
of their deeds; their deeds are the womb from which they sprang; with
their deeds they are bound up; their deeds are their refuge.
Whatever deeds they do-good or evil-of such they will be the heirs.
A. III. 33: And wherever the beings spring into existence, there their
deeds will ripen; and wherever their deeds ripen, there they will earn
the fruits of those deeds, be it in this life, or be it in the next
life, or be it in any other future life.
S. XXII. 99: There will come a time, when the mighty ocean will dry
up, vanish, and be no more. There will come a time, when the mighty
earth will be devoured by fire, perish, and be no more. But, yet there
will be no end to the suffering of beings, who, obstructed by ignorance,
and ensnared by craving, are hurrying and hastening through this round
of rebirths.
THIRD TRUTH
THE NOBLE TRUTH OF THE EXTINCTION OF
SUFFERING
D. 22: WHAT, now, is the Noble Truth of the Extinction of Suffering?
It is the complete fading away and extinction of this craving, its
forsaking and giving up, the liberation and detachment from it.
But where may this craving vanish, where may it be extinguished?
Wherever in the world there are delightful and pleasurable things,
there this craving may vanish, there it may be extinguished.
S.XII. 66: Be it in the past, present, or future, whosoever of the monks
or priests regards the delightful and pleasurable things in the world
as "impermanent," "miserable," and "without an Ego," as a disease
and cancer; it is he who overcomes the craving.
And released from Sensual Craving, released from the Craving for
Existence, he does not return, does not enter again into existence.
DEPENDENT EXTINCTION OF ALL PHENOMENA
S. XII 43: For, through the total fading away and extinction of
Craving, Clinging is extinguished; through the extinction of clinging, the
Process of Becoming is extinguished; through the extinction of the
(karmic) process of becoming, Rebirth is extinguished; and through
the extinction of rebirth, Decay and Death, Sorrow, Lamentation,
Suffering, Grief, and Despair, are extinguished. Thus comes about
the extinction of this whole mass of suffering.
S. XII 30: Hence, the annihilation, cessation, and overcoming of
corporeality, feeling, perception, mental formations, and
consciousness, this is the extinction of suffering, the end of
disease, the overcoming of old age and death.
[The undulatory motion, which we call wave-which in the spectator
creates the illusion of a single mass of water moving over the surface
of the lake-is produced and fed by the wind, and maintained by the
stored-up energies. After the wind has ceased, and no fresh wind again
whips up the water, the stored-up energies will gradually be consumed,
and the whole undulatory motion come to an end. Similarly, if fire
does not get new fuel, it will become extinct. just so, this
Five-Khandha-process-which, in the ignorant worldling, creates the
illusion of an Ego-entity-is produced and fed by the life-affirming
craving, and maintained for some time by means of the stored-up
life-energies. Now, after the fuel, i.e., the craving and clinging
to life, has ceased, and no new craving impels again this
Five-Khandha-process, life will continue as long as there are still
life-energies stored up, but at their destruction at death, the
Five-Khandha-process will reach final extinction.
Thus, nirvana or "Extinction" (Sanskrit: to cease blowing, to
become extinct), may be considered under two aspects:
1. "Extinction of Impurities," reached at the attainment of
Arahatship, or Holiness, which takes place during the life-time.
2. "Extinction of the Five-Khandha-process," which takes place at
the death of the Arahat.]
NIRVANA
A. III. 32: This, truly, is the Peace, this is the Highest, namely the end
of all formations, the forsaking of every substratum of rebirth, the
fading away of craving: detachment, extinction-Nirvana.
A. III. 55: Enraptured with lust, enraged with anger, blinded by
delusion, overwhelmed, with mind ensnared, man aims at his own ruin,
at others' ruin, at the ruin of both parties, and he experiences mental
pain and grief. But, if lust, anger, and delusion are given up, man
aims neither at his own ruin, nor at others' ruin, nor at the ruin
of both parties, and he experiences no mental pain and grief. Thus
is Nirvana immediate, visible in this life, inviting, attractive,
and comprehensible to the wise.
S. XXXVIII. 1: The extinction of greed, the extinction of anger, the
extinction of delusion: this, indeed, is called Nirvana.
THE ARAHAT, OR HOLY ONE
A. VI. 55: And for a disciple thus freed, in whose heart dwells peace,
there is nothing to be added to what has been done, and naught more
remains for him to do. Just as a rock of one solid mass remains
unshaken by the wind, even so, neither forms, nor sounds, nor odors,
nor tastes, nor contacts of any kind, neither the desired, nor the
undesired, can cause such an one to waver. Steadfast is his mind, gained
is deliverance.
Snp 1048: And he who has considered all the contrasts on this earth,
and is no more disturbed by anything whatever in the world, the
Peaceful One, freed from rage, from sorrow, and from longing, he has
passed beyond birth and decay.
THE IMMUTABLE
Ud. VIII. 1: There is a realm, where there is neither the solid, nor the
fluid, neither heat, nor motion, neither this world, nor any other world,
neither sun, nor moon. This I call neither arising, nor passing
away, neither standing still nor being born, nor dying. There is
neither foothold, nor development, nor any basis. This is the end of
suffering.
Ud. VIII. 3: There is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed.
If there were not this Unborn, this Unoriginated, this Uncreated, this
Unformed, escape from the world of the born, the originated, the
created, the formed, would not be possible.
But since there is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed,
therefore is escape possible from the world of the born, the
originated, the created, the formed.
FOURTH TRUTH
THE NOBLE TRUTH OF THE PATH
THAT LEADS TO THE EXTINCTION OF SUFFERING
THE TWO EXTREMES AND THE MIDDLE PATH
S. LVI. 11: TO GIVE oneself up to indulgence in sensual pleasure, the
base, common, vulgar, unholy, unprofitable; and also to give oneself up
to self-mortification, the painful, unholy, unprofitable: both these
two extremes the Perfect One has avoided, and found out the Middle
Path, which makes one both to see and to know, which leads to peace,
to discernment, to enlightenment, to Nirvana.
THE EIGHTFOLD PATH
It is the Noble Eightfold Path, the way that leads to the extinction
of suffering, namely:
1. Right Understanding, 2. Right Mindedness, which together are
Wisdom.
3. Right Speech, 4. Right Action, 5. Right Living, which together
are Morality.
6. Right Effort, 7. Right Attentiveness, 8. Right Concentration,
which together are Concentration.
This is the Middle Path which the Perfect One has found out, which
makes one both to see and to know, which leads to peace, to
discernment, to enlightenment, to Nirvana.
M. 139: Free from pain and torture is this path, free from groaning and
suffering; it is the perfect path.
Dhp 274-5: Truly, like this path there is no other path to the purity of
insight. If you follow this path, you will put an end to suffering.
Dhp 276: But each one has to struggle for himself, the Perfect Ones
have only pointed out the way.
M. 26: Give ear then, for the Immortal is found. I reveal, I set forth
the Truth. As I reveal it to you, so act! And that supreme goal of the
holy life, for the sake of which, sons of good families rightly go
forth from home to the homeless state: this you will, in no long time,
in this very life, make known to yourself, realize, and make your own.
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlThu Nov 30 12:02:37 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 19:27:58 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: MacEoin, Afnan & Hatcher
I think Seena is right - the Maceoin vs Afnan & Hatcher
debate (a series of attack & reposte articles) did more
public damage to the Faith than the Hinnels intervention,
and presumably contributed to the polarized and polemical
approach which followed. But - correct me if I am wrong -
aren't Afnan and Hatcher also "Bahai academics"? Their
intervention was very unfortunate, but can hardly be used
as an example to show that there should be MORE
consultation with academics. It's one of those cases which
show how the review process could sometimes be positive:
if Afnan & Hatcher could have been persuaded not to reply
or at least to restrict themselves to real weakness in the
MacEoin 'Holy War' article (and I think there was only
one, and that not serious) without the ad hominem attacks,
the cause of Bahai studies, and, not incidentally, the public
image of the Bahai community, would have suffered much
less damage.
On the other hand, if other Baha'i academics had pitched in
to offer other viewpoints, we could have given evidence of
diversity. And personally I prefer the free market to the
planned economy approach.
For those interested, the articles are
- MacEoin, The Babi concept of Holy War, Religion 12
(1982) 93-129
- Afnan & Hatcher 'Western Islamic scholarship and Baha'i
origins' (vol 15, 1985 29-49).
- Denis MacEoin, Baha'i Fundamentalism and the
Academic Study of the Babi movement, *Religion* vol 16
57-84, 1986
- Afnan and Hatcher, Note on MacEoin's 'Baha'i
Fundamentalism', *Religion* vol 16 187-192
- MacEoin, D., Afnan, Hatcher and an Old Bone, vol 16
1986 193-5
There were also another *Religion* article by MacEoin in
1983, 219-255, 'The Baha'i Faith and its critics', but I don't
have a copy of this.
Sen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen McGlinn ph: 31-43-216854
Andre Severinweg 47 email: Sen.McGlinn@RL.RuLimburg.NL
6214 PL Maastricht, the Netherlands
***
When, however, thou dost contemplate the innermost essence of things,
and the individuality of each,
thou wilt behold the signs of thy Lord's mercy . . ."
------------------------------------------------------------------------\'1a
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduThu Nov 30 12:03:03 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 13:22:30 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Juan R Cole
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: There's your problem, right there.
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, Juan R Cole wrote:
> Please help me out here.
> [Except what do I do about Baha'u'llah's explicit abolition of absolute
> authority [as-sultah al-mutlaqah] on the basis that Reason has
> become manifest among all [zuhur al-`aql bayn al-kull]? Has this passage
> of Baha'u'llah been abrogated? By whom? When?
[...]
> What do we say about Shoghi Effendi's explicit
> statement that he was not empowered to legislate, or about our own
> knowledge that he was not empowered to abrogate Baha'u'llah's principles,
> though as Head of the Faith he could legitimately set them aside for
> practical reasons at any one point?]
> ... we need to rethink
> how to achieve *Baha'u'llah*'s goals in the 21st century.
> ... the historically conditioned
> decisions of a Guardian functioning without an authoritative legislative
> body
My suggestion is that you re-evaluate the Guardian's statements and look
for their unity with the statements of Baha'u'llah. I suggest that you
have grievously misunderstood Shoghi Effendi if you believe that he set
aside any of Baha'u'llah's principles; he expressly disavowed doing such a
thing. Much of the guidance we seek from the House, and which the friends
earlier sought from the Guardian, was to determine which principle applies
to a given situation. As you are well aware, in American law the Supreme
Court decides where freedom of speech ends and duty to government begins,
for example. These various Baha'i principles intersect with one another.
While this is basic jurisprudence, what I am saying is that my
understanding of the power of the Head of the Faith to guide, means that
the Guardian and the House are empowered to correctly choose and apply
which of these competing principles applies to a given situation. The
Guardian stated in the Dispensation that the House possesses the power to
not only supplement the laws of Baha'u'llah, but to apply them; and it is
this power of application that I think you are addressing.
Your naive friend in New Mexico
Poirier the Lawyer
From burlb@bmi.netThu Nov 30 12:05:45 1995
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 22:37 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: jrcole@umich.edu
Subject: Re: A civilised conversation
>Concerning your comments on the Bab's grammer, Judy wrote back and said:
>Dear Burl--
>
>A very pretty piece of work.
>
>However, I don't think it solves the problem. In fact, I really think it
>finesses the problem. Here's why:
>
>Q: Why does one care about how "grammatical" the Bab's Arabic was?
>
>Answer: He was a Manifestation of God, writing in the Holy Language of God.
>
>Q: How do we know this is the Holy Language of God?
>
>Answer: Because that's the language of the Qur'an.
>
>But if that's the case, then the Bab CANNOT write in some idiosyncratic
>one-person Arabic, or Persio-Arabic--all this cuts no mustard; what is the
>sign and prrof of his being a Manifestion of God is that he can write in the
>same classical, perfect Arabic of the *Qur'an*. If God has an "accent"
>depending on local ways of speaking, God might as well speak Persian!
>
>This is not the same problem for the New Testament! No one cares, except
>maybe ardent fundamentalists, that the Greek of the NT is the common,
>"coarse" Greek of the ordinary people of the day. No one is suggesting God
>"spoke" Greek, and the idea is that people are "inspired" to write by God,
>not that they took down God's exact words. Textual criticism has a long,
>honourable history in the Christian tradition, and the Koine Greek is simply
>not a puzzlement or problem--it's not inherent in the faith.
>
>It IS, however, a problem for a Muslim--or for a product of a Muslim culture.
>Why do you think all those Indonesian and African boys learn Arabic? Why do
>you think translation of the Qur'an was resisted for so long? And is still
>not viewed as the "real" Qur'an?
>
>Did you get the paper? We had a problem with the address, so it took awhile
>to resend it.
>
>Warm regards--
>
>Judy
>
>
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From Alethinos@aol.comThu Nov 30 12:06:18 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 02:07:55 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: What is Talisman good for?
Sen:
I wondered who would be the first out of the chute to start this typical
response. I guess you pulled the duty huh?
In a priv. note you suggested I should tone things down a bit - lower the
volume. Why? So that we can continue to hear the never-ending cry of the
oppressed here? (And please people stop using or ref. to Danny O here - he
and I get along quite well - corresponding in priv. and he has _yet_ to tell
me he feels *oppressed* by the supposed darker undercurrents of my posts.)
Sen, it was a good ploy to suggest that I have not offered anything into
the vacuum I am (again supposedly) creating here. Unfortunately you and I
know full well that I have repeatedly directed our attention (when we are
ref. specifically to America - which is what roughly 98% of the complaining
is about - re: institutions, rights, etc) to the Guardian's writings
concerning America's spiritual destiny. I have, as have others, tried to
engage the list members in a solid discourse in what ails the American Baha'i
community, to analysis our mistakes so that we can correct them and finally,
successfully arise to fulfill the Guardian's vision. You and I have actually
have had som heated and interesting debates on the issues of axiology and
individualism. David Taylor was certainly in on it as was Terry C., and
others.
No Sen, few, if any will be attracted to a *new and improved* Faith. The
vain attempts here to try and dress up this Cause in a fashion that would
find great favor on Oprah or in an interview with Larry King Live on CNN will
not touch the hearts of the masses. No amount of placating to the PC police
will insure the loyalty of an already deeply cynical and spiritual exhuasted
nation. This is already a matter of history in this country - esp. among the
more *liberal* protestant churches - and their numbers have been steadily
declining for the past quarter century. The thing that is sad is that while
these churches are in decline - those that preach intolerance have seen a
dramatic rise in new adherents.
Those that have complained so loudly and insistently here continue to miss
the point. And the point is this: THE problem is not _in_ the institutions.
The solutions are NOT in reforms. DO problems exist? Damn right they do! Is
there a need for significant *maturity* (a term I prefer for various reasons
over that of *reform*)? Absolutely! Will any of this occur? Nope.
It will _not_ occur - not as things stand now. The problems that Juan and
Linda et al continue to lament are not structural in nature. Certainly the
*narrowness* of the present administrative order is a contributor to these
ills. But that narrowness is the outcome of a stagnant, spiritually
unconscious Baha'i community.
These *problems* and miscarriages of justice stem from a national
community that is frozen in fear. It is a community that so closely resembles
America in general that there is no appreciable difference. It is a community
that has all the spiritual instruments and medicines necessary to effect a
radical change in the soul of this nation. And yet it is a community fast
asleep. In ignoring the harsh glare of the difficult Vision the Guardian has
called us to accept it has become a hapless victim of the same spiritual
diseases that plague the greater Community around it. We as Baha'is are in
just as much psychic pain as everyone else. We see it in our so-called
communities, and in the eyes of many of our friends who seem increasingly
disaffected toward the Faith. We see it here on this list.
The way out of this is simple. We stop trying to avoid our destiny and
embrace it. We stop trying to go around, over, under. We stop backing up. We
stop trying to make ourselves like everyone else. The way out is to go
_through_.
The changes that are so desperately needed will come when we arise and
shake the foundations, the false pillars, upon which this nation rests. By
this I do not mean (and I believe Terry C knows this now) we beat those
half-dead horses that are the favorite targets of both liberals on one side
and conservatives on the other. We have spent too long either trying vainly
to pretend that as Baha'is we had no political agenda, or thrusting our
wetted fingers in the air to see which way the socio-cultural winds were
blowing this week. (I guess there is of course the third course, made up of a
not-too-inconsiderable share of the believers here in this country - those
that closely resemble some kind of group frozen in time - blissfully ignorant
of the Reality surrounding them - serious lala land types.)
One last little point. I too love to grab the wonderful things that float
by on this list. Nima and I have a wonderful time with Plato and neoplat.
stuff. I love reading Juan's contributions - they are extremely
thought-provoking esp. when he is tying Islam and the Faith together. When
Buck tosses stuff out here and Burl too I love that. QDL's poems and and the
other wonderful people here make this a great list. I would never want that
to change. But we are not one-dimensional here. I think we can share all this
stuff and still tackle this very large and difficult issue.
And that issue is this: given what the American Baha'i Community needs to
accomplish - considering the role that needs be played by this country in the
unfoldment of the Cause world-wide - and given the manifest failure so far of
the community in arising, HOW BEST can we, at this late hour, help out
brothers and sisters arise? How can we galvanize these descendents of the
dawn-breakers to stand up and truly begin a radical movement that will sweep
across this country and seize the consciousness of America? How do we emulate
the dawn-breakers - given that our constraints are in many ways far greater?
How do we get the community to finally become Revolutionary??
Yes Sen, I have my ideas. But it isn't about my ideas, or yours. It is
about Our ideas. It is about a collective undertaking. It is about forming a
critical mass of friends that are so welded together through a unity of
thought that we literally cause a spiritual chain reaction across this
continent.
You see it is a very difficult task. It is the one given us by the
Guardian. And unfortunately for Juan and Linda and everyone else - it _is_
the only way we are going to ever see the _real_ changes we desire. The
question is, do we have the courage to attempt it?
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From barazanf@dg-rtp.dg.comThu Nov 30 12:06:37 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:58:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Farzin Barazandeh
To: Talisman
Subject: Re: It's 3 O'Clock in the morning
Jim,
I like your passionate writings and they do invigorate the Babi inside of
me at the Fortress which has a clear mission and fighting the infidels
that have not yet recognized their destiny and mission,
but help little with the Baha'i inside of me that must
understand and consort with the same infidels.
It might be true that "we are changed more through loving and being loved" and
less through emotional appeals.
Furthermore, it appears that our attitudes and perceptions are profoundly
affected when faced with truth in the presence of love and understanding
and not much through mental persuasion.
Farzin
From jrcole@umich.eduThu Nov 30 12:08:57 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:55:31 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: "Stephen R. Friberg"
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: On review
Stephen: I promise not to attack you, but I do have to disagree with you
on this issue. And I guess I also have to point out that since you do
not publish academic works on the Baha'i Faith, you do not face the
problems involved and so it is easy for you to hold the views that you do.
The main problem you do not deal with is the one of conscience. As an
academic historian, employed by the people of the state of Michigan to
tell them and others about the history of the modern Middle East, I have
a professional responsibility to maximize information. It would be wrong
of me to suppress a passage I had written in an academic paper because
the NSA asked me to, except in some rare instance such as that it might
endanger the life of someone.
Academic historians take a sort of implicit oath not to suppress relevant
information, not to let third parties interfere with free inquiry; and the
Standards and Practices guide of the American Historical Association
encourages historians to seek the least possible restraints on their
writings and to be careful fully to report any restraints that exist.
For an academic in the humanities or social sciences, official Baha'i
Review is rather analogous to asking a physician to break her Hippocratic
Oath.
If the goal of Review is as stated, to ensure dignity and accuracy, then
ordinary academic peer refereeing will anyway perform that function for
academics. If the goal is something more sinister, such as control of
information by the Baha'i authorities or ensuring that everything
published is good for Public Relations, then the practice is unethical.
Either way, it should be abolished.
I don't believe `Abdu'l-Baha envisaged that at the end of the 20th
century Baha'i institutions would be vetting Baha'i academic books! I do
think that in the past 30 years Baha'i Review has been reconceived as
something close to censorship in part by powerful elderly Iranians, whose
main experience has been with Pahlevi and Khomeinist Iran and Israel, all
of which are heavily censored societies.
As for Baha'i intellectuals needing to be on their best behavior so as to
"prove" their worthiness to be released from Review, I believe you are
still blaming the victims. If Review is lifted, it should not be because
anyone is deemed "mature" but because the Baha'i Faith stands for freedom
of conscience and freedom of expression, and these are the bedrock
principles of our religion to which Review was a temporary *exception.*
I did not say it; `Abdu'l-Baha said it:
At the Central Congregational Church in Brooklyn on 16 June 1912,
he said: "Just as in the world of politics there is need for free thought,
likewise in the world of religion there should be the right of
unrestricted individual belief. Consider what a vast difference exists
between modern democracy and the old forms of despotism. Under an
autocratic government the opinions of men are not free, and
development is stifled, whereas in a democracy, because thought and
speech are not restricted, the greatest progress is witnessed. It is
likewise true in the world of religion. When freedom of conscience,
liberty of thought and right of speech prevail--that is to say, when
every man according to his own idealization may give expression to his
beliefs--development and growth are inevitable." (PUP 197)
We don't want Baha'i "development" to be "stifled," now do we?
cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan
From s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.eduThu Nov 30 12:10:47 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 10:57:37 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: Framework for Baha'i Civil Discourse
Dear Friends,
I think we need to do a deepening on Consultation - any
takers?
One important thing that email lacks is a prayerful
atmosphere. I have a suggestion: that each day (or every
few hours as the case may be :-) that we check our email,
we say the "Remover of Difficulties" before envoking the
command to check our messages.
regards,
sAmAn
From s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.eduThu Nov 30 13:56:06 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:21:39 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: Juan R Cole
Subject: Re: Framework for Baha'i Civil Discourse
> Saman-jan: Wouldn't this procedure risk making half the messages go away?
>
> :-)
>
>
> Juan
>
Dear Juan,
Ahhhh... the unexpected outcomes of prayer!:-)
take care,
sAmAn
From mfoster@tyrell.netThu Nov 30 13:58:18 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:03:04 -0600 (CST)
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Open Letter to Rev. Moon
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Talismanians -
In view of recent discussions on issues such as a Baha'i court, a
Baha'i bill of rights, etc., I thought that the following post (taken
from the New Religions List), which was written by a "dissident" member
of the Unification Church, interesting.
What I think that this message shows is that virtually the same
sorts of discussions which we have seen on Talisman are part of a
broader "culture wars" phenomenon which extends beyond the Baha'i
community. Actually, many of the perspectives expressed on this list
are, I think, a mirror of what can be found in many religious movements
- including the Unification Church (which I have been studying since
1975 - seriously since around 1980).
Perhaps it can be a caution to us. What, I think, we see happening
on Talisman, as I think will be shown in this post, is a general social
trend - especially in religious movements. I have seen similar debates
on the Meher Baba list, the two Unification Church lists, and the Quaker
list. If we are to be about the business of building a New World Order,
then perhaps we ought to be cautious that we do not fall into the
cultural quick sand which has engulfed so much of the religious world.
Mark (Foster)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
29th November 1995
London.
I do feel that my following letter may be of interest to scholars of NRM's
for a number of reasons. For example:
1: The fact that NRM's are rarely stagnant organisations but that like any
religion they evolve and that at certain stages in their development their
membership can become polarised into
liberal/reformist/revisionist/modernist/anti-literalist and
conservative/fundamentalist factions that the world's larger religions are
divided into.
2: The Unification Church which has been one of the major NRM's that has
opened itself up to allow studies of itself by sociologists of religion is
now at a major cross-roads where internationally the internal division
between the two camps is becoming more radically pronounced; at least in
Western Europe and America in particular. I see little evidence however of
internal dissent happening to the same extent in, say, the Japanese
movement, though I have relatively no contact with any Japanese members who
are interested in an honest an open discussion of issues.
I would hold that the image of the adherents of the Unification faith as an
uncritical cult of personality around its founder only holds true for a
certain Unificationists; a great many others, particularly among those in
the West who have been in the movement the longest, have come to find the
neo-Confucionist emperor-worship aspect to be highly offensive and to be a
major source of the problems which the movement now faces in this stage in
its growth.
I might also add that the posting of this letter on the Unification internet
forum sparked a call for my expulsion from the forum, as I am no longer
considered 'friendly' to the Unification Church, at least by certain
Unificationists, though it must be said that I and others have disputed
this. In addition I have been described in writing by certain
Unificationists as 'apostate,' as a 'child of Satan,' and as a 'Judas,' and
the taking of such a perspective has, in my opinion, been a cause of past
apostacy by the movement's internal critics. Such 'critics' have in the past
faced similar anathematisation for daring to question the movement. If the
Unification movement refuses to objectively submit itself to such internal
soul searching and dialogue with its own internal critics then I see little
hope for its positive evolution and its ability to change the more
questionable aspects of its nature. My desire is to see the Unification
Church evolve itself into an which reflects the substantiation of
Unification idealism; an idealism which originally attracted so many of its
international membership, including myself.
I have edited the letter since its original posting a few weeks ago, and I
omit certain specific allegations of corruption and the abuse due to the
understandably litigation sensitive nature of (NUREL-L, for example). It has
been requested by members of the Unification Church that I make it clear
that I no longer speak as a member of the Unification Church, and so I'd
like to make this point clear. This is much to my regret, as I feel that the
Unification movement has failed to substantiate its admittedly high
idealism; an idealism which originally attracted me to the movement some 16
years ago.
_____________________________
An Open Letter to the Reverend Sun Myung Moon (edited)
10th November, 1995.
On the Reformation of the Unification Church
Dear Reverend Moon,
Having been associated with the Unification Church since 1979 and having, I
believe, some understanding of the internal problems which the movement
faces, please allow me to draw to your attention some matters which I
consider to be of the greatest importance to the future of the movement.
Please further allow me to offer what I consider to be the only possible
solution to the current situation facing the Unification Church.
The Introduction of an Ecclesiastical Court, or a similar system of
internal discipline.
I wish in this short letter to request the introduction of an system of
internal discipline in the Unification Church which will help to avoid
current abuses. Recently a number of issues have been discussed by members
of the international movement concerning abuses within the Unification Church.
These issues include, for example:
A: The issue of an act of violence (albeit a rare and isolated occurrence)
perpetrated by YYY (a member of the Moon family) against a long serving
member of the Unification Church.
********
What follows in my original letter to Reverend Moon is approximately a page
of known instances of abuse within the Unification Church. As it is not my
intention to feed the tabloids, but rather it is my intention to bring
reformation to the Unification Church, it is my intention to deal with the
cause of these problems - the lack of public accountability - and not the
specifics of the effect.. The specifics of such abuses are anyway not wholly
unique to the Unification Church.
*******
These and a number of other issues have been widely discussed on the
Unification internet forum, and if I may, I wish to propose what I see as
the only possible solution to the current dilemma.
I would propose the instigation of an ecclesiastical court. Let's take, for
example, the issue of the blatant corruption of XXX. In this circumstance
the ecclesiastical court, which would be officiated by elected
representatives, could on the request of church members, call upon XXX to
explain himself. He could offer a defence, and likewise his accusers could
similarly offer their case. If he refused to attend such a court, or if
found to have behaved in a manner inconsistent with his position, the court
could recommend that he be dismissed from the ecclesiastical hierarchy. The
transcript and judgement of the court would be made entirely public. What
would be the consequence of this? Well, if the media were to raise the
issue, it would only be raising the issue of the corruption and exploitation
of members by one individual and not by the ecclesiastical institution as
such; nor could it claim that the ecclesiastical structure permitted such a
thing to happen. The media would thus find it hard to accuse either yourself
or the Church of perpetrating such an offence. Similarly in the Catholic
Church, many priests behave in an indecent manner, but if there is a process
of discipline, the offender may be removed from his office, or disciplined,
thus disallowing any criticism of the institution and protecting the
integrity of the Church.
Let's take the scenario of YYY (a particular known abuse by a member of the
Moon family). Recently a number of members of the Church have attempted to
encourage the victim of this to remain publicly silent on this issue. I
however would encourage the radically opposite approach. Let's say that the
media reports the alleged incident and then has to say that the offender,
YYY, was severely reprimanded by the Unification Church's own internal
ecclesiastical court, and fined an appropriate sum; the record being made
entirely public. Would the media then be able to attack either you or the
Church. No, the Church's integrity would be intact; it would be seen to have
acted justly and fairly. Let's say, however, that the media reported the
actual situation, that the victim received a letter from Zin Moon Kim, Tyler
Hendricks and James Baughman, leaders of the American Church, defending the
perpetrator of this crime and virtually anathematising the victim. How does
the church look? Is its integrity protected. No, not by any means. Thus the
absence of a system of checks and balances, of public accountability, is
indeed, in my opinion, the major flaw of the Unification Church, and a flaw
which if the current situation continues, will only further enhance the
reputation of the Church as a rather unrespectable cult religion which
exploits its members, asks them to follow their leaders unquestioningly,
without formal means of redress, and with a neo-fascist cultic devotion. The
recent withdrawal of your European Union visas appear to me to further
highlight the situation that the Unification Church is failing to lose its
status as a bizarre religious cult. The establishment of an ecclesiastical
court would be the first step in turning the movement away from this trend
and to allow it to scrutinise itself before the general public.
I urge you to instigate such a system and allow the Unification Church to
become an instrument for goodness. I truly believe that if such a similar
system is not initiated, that the Unification Church may be unable to reform
itself and will become increasingly attacked by the media for entirely valid
and fitting reasons. I believe that if such an internal reformation does
not take place that the Church will become an increasingly unattractive
option in the free marketplace of religion, that division among the
membership which is already apparent will increase, that the Church may face
formal division, increasing apostasy and disillusionment among its
membership, and that judgement will be brought upon the movement from both
within and without.
Charitable Trusts
The next step would be the establishment of independent national and
international charitable trusts with elected officers which would oversee
the financial affairs of the movement and would decentralise financial
control away from you and your family. The reasons for this should need no
elaboration.
Brazil
I would also urge you to reconsider the building of a 'model city' in Brazil
and to invest your available resources into projects which will contribute
to world peace and to the building of an ideal world in general - a concept
consistent with the idealism which attracted so many of us to the
Unification movement - and not the initiation of a separatist and isolated
religious community or the establishment of a world media and industrial
empire. The Brazil issue is anyway a public relations nightmare and the
media can hardly be blamed for comparing this to the Jonestown attempt to
build a 'model city.'
Saeilo
I would also urge you to discontue production of the Kahr K9 semi-automatic
pistol at the company Saeilo Inc (USA) run by your son and staffed by Church
members. I might ask if you, as the founder of a religious organisation
which has 'world peace' as one of its goals, consider it appropriate to
manufacture weapons for sale on the mass market? I might add that I see an
inherent contradiction between the kind of religious idealism which
attracted myself and a number of my closest friends to the Unification
movement so many years ago, and the current guns and money undercurrent
within the Unification movement.
Yours Sincerely
Martin Boyd.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Boyd (martinboyd@easynet.co.uk)
London
United Kingdom
'Religion itself is outraged, when outrage is committed in the name of religion'
M.K. Gandhi
""..for I believe neither in the infallibility of the Pope nor that of the
Councils, since it is established that these have often made mistakes and
contradictions........My conscience is taken captive by God's word......for
to act against our conscience is neither safe for us, nor open to us. On
this I take my stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen.
Martin Luther
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From barazanf@dg-rtp.dg.comThu Nov 30 13:58:59 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 12:17:54 -0500 (EST)
From: Farzin Barazandeh
To: Talisman
Subject: Re: Wilmette ain't Berlin
There were two students and both dedicated to their ways.
Naturally, conflict arouse and they decided to go to the Shaykh
which was known for his wisdom.
The first one went to the Shaykh's chamber and
explained his ideas and the Shaykh after a long pause
said, "you are right my son." He left the chamber happily.
Then the second student entered and he too explained his ideas and
the Shaykh after a long pause said, "you are right my son."
He too left the chamber happily.
The Shaykh's wife heard the conversation and was perplexed,
so she approached the Shaykh and asked,
how he could tell both of them that they were right even though
they had opposing ideas.
Shaykh paused for a long time and then replied, " you are right too."
Brent,
You are truly loved and appreciated for writing such a powerful msg.
However, your msg proved my naivete because I can not fathom anybody in
this forum would compare the NSA with Nazi with the spirit and characterization
which you implied in your message.
Perhaps, what hurts the Faith the most, might not be the remarks of some
individuals towards some aspects of the Administration or their unique
interpretation of the writings,
but the unnecessary reactions to those remarks which
create the unfortunate hurt and disunity and also gives the undue legitimacy,
power and influence to those remarks.
We might like to consider the possibility that some remarks as repugnant
they might be to some ears, could be
good for the Cause in the larger scheme of things as fire is,
sometimes good for the forest.
It appears that we can not have the luxury of being offended and yet
being truly faithful to the mission of this Cause.
Farzin
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comThu Nov 30 13:59:18 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:42:55 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re . widget goes to Indiana,
My dear Juan
You do not fool me for a moment . The theme of the story is based on
cross references which only point to Linda 'recreated by Burl into a
wild religious Ninja ' Walbridge . I see I depart for two days and my
inbox is full of Talisman messages . I know you are all dying to know
where I went it was to Oregon .
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, Juan R Cole wrote:
> nowhere for a good 15 years. So, I'm Acting Up for Baha'u'llah. Maybe I'm
> a fool. But maybe it will have a good effect. I don't mind being a fool
> for Baha'u'llah, as you once also said. :-)
From richs@microsoft.comThu Nov 30 14:07:31 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:56:59 -0800
From: richs@microsoft.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu, s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.edu
Subject: RE: Framework for Baha'i Civil Discourse
Dear Talizens and sAmAn,
From: Saman Ahmadi[SMTP:s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.edu]
>I think we need to do a deepening on Consultation - any
>takers?
Count me in!
>One important thing that email lacks is a prayerful
>atmosphere. I have a suggestion: that each day (or every
>few hours as the case may be :-) that we check our email,
>we say the "Remover of Difficulties" before envoking the
>command to check our messages.
It's not an altogether bad idea to say one or two before
hitting the send key on that heated message (advice I
should follow myself, no?).
Warmest Regards,
Rick
From 100735.2257@compuserve.comThu Nov 30 14:09:25 1995
Date: 30 Nov 95 12:56:32 EST
From: "H.C. deFlerier deCourcelles" <100735.2257@compuserve.com>
To: Talisman
Cc: sabredance <100725.315@compuserve.com>,
Madame Linda Walbridge
Subject: comparing apples to oranges
TO: Talisman, INTERNET: TALISMAN@INDIANA.EDU
Re: comparing apples to oranges
FROM: sabredance, INTERNET:100725.315@compuserve.com
TO: talisman, INTERNET:TALISMAN@UCS.INDIANA.EDU
DATE: 30-11-1995 01:06
Re: re comparing apples to oranges
> <
> please. Mr. Singh, no doubt, will find other company more suited to his
> "humor."
> t he was offending me, he would comply with my wishes. Mr. S. did not. >>
>
> Linda,
>
> Since you choose to reply to my personal post to you on talisman, i will do
the
> same, although i did not want to bore other talismanians with this.
> There was simply no time for mr Singh to change his tone, because some of the
I presume that this is a reference to the incidence that had been
boiling over when I first started reading this newsgroup. If so, it seems to me
that the Mr. Singh referred to above is actually Monsieur J.K.A. Singh-Rathore
who apparently does not have access to this bandwidth.
For many reasons, I am not in a position to judge the rights and wrongs
the rights of his access. However, when he in his final messages offered to
provide with the archives upon request, I was among those who procured them
promptly in order to understand what might have transpired before I imported
this forum into our network. For the kind information of those who may not have
not yet have had the opportunity of seeing the contents of that archive, I would
like to specify that it carries the posting bearing the original one line
complimentary remarks that Monsieur Singh-Rathore made toward Madame van
Rooijen, the angry and insulting response made against him by Monsieur David
Taylor, followed by similar responses from a few others and those posted by one
demanding Monsieur John Walbridge to expel Monsieur Singh-Rathore. Quite
amazingly, in one of the headings concerning him, he was even referred to as a
psychopath - and in another subject post, Monsieur or Doctor David Taylor
proceeds to present an indepth psychoanalysis of Monsieur Singh-Rathore. It also
contains the series of responses Monsieur Singh-Rathore made towards some of
those aggressive and insulting remarks that were directed at him.
The above appears to have taken place on the public bandwidth. Now, the
archive also contains messages that seem to have been exchanged on private
bandwidth. I have gone through them again. All the messages, in chronological
order form a cohesive thread. However, what seems quite shocking to me is the
contents of the messages sent to on the private bandwidth. I shall refrain from
pointing my finger at the authors of those words in order to allow the
atmosphere to cool down. However, it is my opinion that words addressed to him
on the private bandwidth are something that would never have come from persons
(at least two in this case) with even a small iota of sense of civilised
conduct.
As for those of Monsieur Singh-Rathore, it is clear visible that his
disposition gradually transforming from a jocular to irritation to indignation
as justified by the words directed at him that range from insults to threats on
his life (to which he responded to the sender drawing his attention to the legal
course of action that his threats are likely to provoke. Immediately following
that are the list owners announcement that Monsieur Singh-Rathore was being
expelled from this newsgroup and the ensuing correspondence between the two
gentlemen.
It also contains some of the private correspondence privately exchanged
between Madame Linda Walbridge and a few other members of this newsgroup where
the subject matter is Monsieur J.K.A. Singh-Rathore - and one message written by
him to Madame Walbridge.
I needed to explain what (the above) I have read so that the readers
know what my opinions are based upon.
Now I only have more questions about the Baha'i Faith and the practices
of its followers:
I have not found one single word written by Monsieur Singh-Rathore which
can even barely qualify to have been called as profane or threat as Monsieur et
Madame Linda Walbridge seem to have construed - or in the least - to have been
led to conclude. Even under serious insults and threats to his life he has not
employed a single word that can qualify his remarks as being either profane or
insulting. His responses in private to the privately issued insults and threats
on his life are as firm and direct as the situation warranted. It is not a joke
when an Iranian national threatens to "talk to his European connections with
Hezbullah" and have Monsieur Singh-Rathore, (a a high profiled volunteer with
the UNHCR) assassinated. Monsieur Singh-Rathore's words that private warning to
the Iranian gentleman is question is legitimate and do not appear as threat
against a fellow member as Monsieur et Madame Walbridge seem to have concluded,
but as an essential and legally permitted course of action essential to
safeguarding his personal safety.
Now to the questions:
This newsgroup professes its allegiance to the Baha'i Faith. One of the
principles enjoined by the Founder of the Faith is: Independent Investigation of
Truth, which has also been underscored by His Own Pen in His Hidden Words
somewhat to the effect of "see through your own eyes and not through the eyes of
your neighbour."
In the archives I was able to obtain from Monsieur Singh-Rathore, I have
not found a single line from the listowner inviting his version of the chain of
events. However, I do find a series of perfectly polite and courteous messages
Monsieur Singh-Rathore has addressed to Monsieur John Walbridge wherein he
explains his version of events. In the archives concerned, I have not found a
single reply from the addressee.
The next question:
The Founder of Faith has also enjoined His followers to refrain from
backbiting. Presently, Monsieur Singh-Rathore does not have access to the
material posted on this forum. His character and personality are being cast in
his absence in the most formidably dark light without even a chance for him to
present his defence (which seems to be the main force propelling my response).
Before I My personal connections with the Baha'i Community started with
the friendship between a couple of Baha'is and my late grandfather nearly 75
years ago. Those links have continued till today with me having many Baha'is as
my close friends, colleagues and business associates whose most "kindly radiant
hearts" I cherish - and with who I sometimes share the essence of not only this
forum, but also other Baha'i forums, leading to lengthy discussions and various
degrees of enlightenment. To my understanding that I have gathered from those
talks and the Baha'i Scriptures, I have gathered that Baha'U'llah and His
Successors enjoin the followers not to engage in any backbiting in any form.
In passing this is also an apt moment to allude to a recent political
tragedy that has touched the hearts of all peace lovers Worldwide: The
Assassination of the Hon. Prime Minister Monsieur Yitzak Rabin. Most of us have
heard the outcries that ensued and how many leaders, religious and political,
attributed to the backbiting the noble victim had been subjected to by some
groups and how it has stimulated the assassin to act on their behalf. When the
non-Baha'i world which may not even have received the message of Baha'U'llah
stands up condemns backbiting as the root cause of this most heinous cold
blooded murder of a Jew by a fellow Jew, I am asking myself, how the Baha'is
should rise and stand up against backbiting of Baha'is by fellow Baha'is.
Then after reading and rereading the archives I obtained from Monsieur
Singh-Rathore as well as the remarks made on this forum by Madame Linda
Walbridge, I have come to certain conclusion which I believe would be in the
interest of the sound image Baha'i Community in the scrutinising eyes of the
public who have either direct or indirect access to the materials that appear on
this forum.
I feel convinced that, as far as Talisman is concerned, he has been
nothing but the victim of backbiting, serious lack and lapses in the correct
procedures essential to the management and peaceful resolution of interpersonal
conflicts and disputes. In my opinion, this is a failure that your fellow
Baha'is I know seem to feel utterly ashamed of.
In conclusion: All I can say is that every human being, whether a Baha'i
or not, would make a great contribution to World Unity and Peace, if only they
would heed to Baha'U'llah's Most Famous First Counsel dispensed through His
Hidden Words. Perhaps, I have a favourable prejudice for this First Counsel. It
was the best that my grandfather liked, and though not a sworn Baha'i, had it
engraved on a brass plate which till today hangs above the door of the study and
my eyes stand glued to it since much before I learned to read. His words (my
grandfather's) ring in my ears. "That is they key to your happiness!" he would
say pointing to it and explaining its meaning and implications while I sat in
front of him in the visitors chair.
It is much more easy to make ourselves worthy of the love of others than
to love them. Loving others depends upon the challenges their human frailties
we encounter. We have no control over that. Nevertheless, we have, if not full,
a better control over our own thoughts, speech, deeds and character. By
influencing those that is in our immediate control, it is possible to make
ourselves more loveable (again the First Counsel). That way, we are more sure of
producing the love that is essential to the Cause of Peace and Unity in the
Human Society. Once again, some verses from the Hidden Words of Baha'U'llah ring
in my ears:
O SON OF MAN!
Breathe not the sins of others so long as thou art thyself a
sinner. Shouldst thou transgress this command, accursed wouldst thou be,
and to this I bear witness.
Each night before I retire, I count my sins and I would feel so ashamed if I
should claim to be virtuous. Then I think of the First Counsel, fall asleep with
those words ringing in my dreams and wake up with those words ringing in my ears
feeling a little bit better in the conscience than the night before - only to
tread through the little challenges of the day and evading the little
temptations that are hurled in my way - sometimes evening succumbing to some of
them, only with a promise that when the night comes I shall admonish myself once
again. According to the above verse from Hidden Words of Baha'U'llah, I may
never attain the status from where I can breathe the sins of others. And what
about the words of my Beloved Jesus Christ? Let the one that has never sinned
pelt the first stone!
No! Not really. Just wanted to say that we have no control over other
people's hearts. Nor their thoughts, speech, deeds nor their character. But on
our own, we surely do. Let's work together on those... and the rest will take
care of itself. Was my grandfather right? I don't know for sure. But I think
that those are the words I shall remember him from. Then something in my heart
says without words that he was right!
Paris Avec tres chaleureuses amities
30-nov-'95 H-C. de Flerier
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduThu Nov 30 14:13:01 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 12:28:36 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: if only I would be...
Dear Jim, after reading your posting this morning, followed by Burl's, I felt
it was important for me to inquire as to your exact meaning. Let me get this
straight, if I were more chaste, had a higher moral rectitude, were less
fearful and more courageous (some might say it would behoove me to be less so),
and spent more time helping my fellow creatures, then I would be on the right
track and doing my part to transform the world.
Jim, I cordially invite you to spend a week - or as long as you would like - in
our home. You might be in for a bit of a surprise.
I am confused about one thing. Are we supposed to be more or less prejudiced?
Seems like the churches that are growing are of the "more" variety, yet I
believe Burl's list showed that we should be less so. Perhaps if I started
hanging out with Norwegians rather than Arabs, Persians, Afhans, and the rest
of that sort, I would be considered less prejudice. I am sure that my affinity
for people from that disreputable part of the world has only harmed my chances
of drawing the high and noble sort of people that we want in the Faith.
Trying very, very hard to let my good nature show through - Linda
P.S. I publicly apologize to Janine for having replied to her private posting
in public. I thought that she had posted to all of Talisman, so I responded
likewise. Anyway, the heading on my e-mail does not always allow me to tell if
I am receiving something privately or openly on Talisman.
I also have some comments on the issue of homosexuality but don't have time
now. More later.
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduThu Nov 30 14:15:45 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 11:55:06 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Farzin Barazandeh
Cc: Talisman
Subject: Re: Wilmette ain't Berlin
On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, Farzin Barazandeh wrote:
(Re: The Shaykh story about everybody being right)
> You are truly loved and appreciated for writing such a powerful msg. >
However, your msg proved my naivete because I can not fathom anybody in >
this forum would compare the NSA with Nazi with the spirit and
characterization > which you implied in your message.
OK, that might have been an extreme characterization of what has been
said. And your point is well taken that exaggeration from any quarter
hurts people. My point was that I find that reading the accusations
against the institutions literally hurts. I distinguish this from the
kind of hurt that I find healthy. For example, it may hurt the NSA to
read what the House wrote to it in May of 1994; but that was offered not
only frankly, but in an atmosphere of perfect support for that body. I
feel that that kind of hurt is the "pain" of the steed of the Valley of
Love.
I welcome the kind of "hurt" from my friends that exposes my ignorance,
prejudices, inaccurate assumptions, flaws, and the like; all of which I
possess in marvelous abundance; the proof being that if I didn't I'd be
manifesting Satori and contributing more effectively to the energizing of
the Baha'i community that Burl and my old roomie Jim Harrison, graduate of
the Baskin Robbins School of Sufism (ascending the Chakra Chips), have
described.
I have seen us in frustration describe one another, and Baha'i
institutions, as autocratic, fascist, Covenant-breakers, fundamentalist,
etc., all of which we wrap up with, "Now, I don't mean that in a *bad*
way." When we reach the end of our rope, instead of doing that (and I am
as guilty as anybody else, mea culpa) somewhere inside of us we have to
turn to our inner light for guidance, learn from one another, look for the
truth in what the other is saying, and if we're not standing on the truth,
move.
Thanks, Farzin. What did I miss in what you wrote?
Brent
From forumbahai@es.co.nzThu Nov 30 14:26:43 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 95 08:05 GMT+1300
From: Alison & Steve Marshall
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Baha'i bill of rights / criminal code
>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.
I asked my National Spiritual Assembly for the equivalent New Zealand
figures. I got a reply a shade over 24 hours later -- that's service!
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 14:52:11 +0000
From: natbahaiofnz@attmail.com (Bev Watson)
Subject: Statistics
To: forumbahai@es.co.nz
30 November 1995 Ref.1503/95
Mr Steve Marshall
Dear Baha'i Friend,
Thank you for your email dated 29 November 1995, requesting statistics about
the number of Baha'is with administrative sanctions placed against them in the
New Zealand Baha'i Community.
In the last 15 years, 67 believers have lost their voting rights. There have
been an additional four believers who have had partial sanctions placed
against them which have prohibited them from being elected to institutions.
Nine of the above believers have applied to have their voting rights restored.
Five of these were restored, and four are still undergoing the prerequisite
process for restoration. The majority of those who have lost their voting
rights have had very little contact with Baha'is and so, even if they have
corrected the situation which led to the loss of their voting rights, they
have not requested to have them restored.
The number of believers in New Zealand is currently 3,970, made up of 2,394
adults, 429 youth and 1,147 children.
Sanctions have only ever been placed against adults believers.
Hope this is helpful. We would be very interested to know the reason for your
request.
Warmest Baha'i Love,
NATIONAL SPIRITUAL ASSEMBLY
Suzanne Mahon
Secretary
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alison and Steve Marshall
Email: forumbahai@es.co.nz
90 Blacks Road, Opoho, Dunedin/Otepoti, Aotearoa/New Zealand
--------------------------------------------------------------
From 100725.315@compuserve.comThu Nov 30 14:36:14 1995
Date: 30 Nov 95 14:11:56 EST
From: sabredance <100725.315@compuserve.com>
To: talisman
Subject: Worthy of the love of others (was:apples and oranges)
<< It is much more easy to make ourselves worthy of the love of others
than
to love them. Loving others depends upon the challenges their human frailties
we encounter. We have no control over that. Nevertheless, we have, if not full,
a better control over our own thoughts, speech, deeds and character. By
influencing those that is in our immediate control, it is possible to make
ourselves more loveable (again the First Counsel). That way, we are more sure of
producing the love that is essential to the Cause of Peace and Unity in the
Human Society. Once again, some verses from the Hidden Words of Baha'U'llah
ring>>
M. de Flerier wrote the above. I want to make one remark: No matter how good we
are, without love for others in our hearts, others will never love us. They may
admire us, envy us, but never love us. To make yourself worthy of the love of
others starts by loving them, unconditionally. At least that is my opinion.
From osborndo@pilot.msu.eduThu Nov 30 16:32:13 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 14:49:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Zhang Osborn
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Qur'anic quote in Kitab-i-Iqan
Allah'u'Abha!
In a polemic against the Faith one author (Alpha-Nazirou Thiam)
claims that there is an error in a quote from the Qur'an used in the
Kitab-i-Iqan. What refutation is there of this argument (which I assume
is not new or infrequent among Muslim polemics)?
Since he writes in French, I dug up English quotations to explain
this claim (thanks to Web sites at U. of N. Carolina & U. of Michigan):
"Even as He saith: `None knoweth the meaning thereof except
God and them that are well-grounded in knowledge.'" (Kitab-
i-Iqan, p. 17) [Qur'anic quote is between single quotation
marks]
"But none knows its interpretation except God, and those who
are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is
all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having
understanding." (Qur'an III, 7)
Thiam argues that the "waw" (="and" in Arabic) was misunderstood as a
"conjunction of coordination" in the Iqan quote, and that the accepted
reading of the passage uses it as a "conjunction of subordination."
Hence in the latter only God really knows and the truly knowledgeable
accept, while in the former both God and the truly knowledgeable know.
Subtle but significant difference, which Thiam calls a grammatical error.
It would seem, however, to be a point that could be argued either
way; but I am schooled in neither Arabic nor the Qur'an... "Say: We
believe in it, it is all from our Lord ...."
What is (are) the Baha'i response(s)?
Don Osborn osborndo@pilot.msu.edu
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzThu Nov 30 16:32:24 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 09:15:00 +1200
From: Robert Johnston
To: belove@sover.net, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: To see beauty is to be beautiful.(was: I can't do this)
Dear Philip,
You have a mind which interests me very much. Did you send
our bio to Talisman? If so I must have missed it, and am sorry that I did.
Regarding the fact that you are now in winter: Please remember that I had
to endure all the northern hempishere tales of summer while I froze down
here. I did not tell David Langness how much I envied him his trip into
the wilderness...
Swans are a beautiful symbol of the soul's immortality, I think. To see
beauty is to be beautiful.
Robert.
I really liked Saman's letter of today.
From snoopy@skipper.physics.sunysb.eduThu Nov 30 16:34:53 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:20:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Stephen Johnson
To: Donald Zhang Osborn
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Qur'anic quote in Kitab-i-Iqan
Allah'u'Abha Don.
I have heard this quote from the Qur'an used by Shi'is as an explanation
of the powers of infallability of the Imams. According to some, this
verse allows for explication of the Qur'an by the Imams who are those
"well-grounded in knowledge". Therefore, a rereading of the
verse which others consider incorrect due to a misunderstanding of the
'conjunction of coordination' actually explicates the infallable
interpretation of the Imams similar to that of the Blessed Guardian:
> "Even as He saith: `None knoweth the meaning thereof except
> God and them that are well-grounded in knowledge.'" (Kitab-
> i-Iqan, p. 17) [Qur'anic quote is between single quotation
> marks]
As you say, I believe that it could be argued either way...however, I'm
waiting for Juan or Chris to respond....
helllllloooooo! :)
stephen
From sbedin@gov.nt.caThu Nov 30 16:35:41 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 14:25:04 MST
From: Stephen Bedingfield
To: Talisman
Cc: Bijan Ma'sumian
Subject: Texas ABS Conference
To all the Talisfolk who gathered at the Texas ABS Conference,
and to our extended family, Greetings:
Well, finally I arrived home on Wednesday and re-subscribed to Talisman, and
although several days since the close of the Texas ABS Conference, I wanted
to say to y'all how wonderful it was to put a face to your names. You
were all quite different from what I had imagined.
Especially Nima! Several of us remarked that we had thought of Nima as
a woman, from Talisman that is, but in fact in person she is a he!
And Terry, you couldn't hid your gentle, embracing spirit under your
quiet reserve if you tried. Glad to have met you.
The presentations were quite good, ranging from Chris Buck's presentation
of some of his research to the lower-end akin to deepenings (IMHO).
And dear Mark. We sacrificed that poor goat prior to his presentation,
to give him the extra edge after an excellent presentation by that other
metaphysicist, Nima :-)
BTW, I had the pictures developed. The one of smoked brisket of goat
on the dinner table in front of a beaming Mark Foster did not turn out well.
I had promised to scan it in and post to Talisman; I'll see how the scanning
turns out first before proceeding.
And perhaps a warm thank-you to Bijan for all the hard work he put into
organizing the Conference, and Hashim Taqvi as well. All of the general
session presentations, except for one, were from Talisfolk.
Loving regards,
stephen
--
Stephen Bedingfield | "We desire but
Box 115, Cambridge Bay NT X0E 0C0 | the good of the world and
Canada (403) 983-2123 | the happiness of the nations"
email: sbedin@inukshuk.gov.nt.ca | - Baha'u'llah
From 100725.315@compuserve.comThu Nov 30 18:32:13 1995
Date: 30 Nov 95 17:17:32 EST
From: sabredance <100725.315@compuserve.com>
To: talisman
Subject: sex and shame in the kitab-i-aqdas
And then there is that virgin-
ity law in the Aqdas where your husband can claim you weren't a virgin and get
rid of you. Would you then be punished twice, having the adultery penalty
imposed after your new husband has dumped you? It seems that God has a double
standard, according to some Baha'is, and thinks chastity is more important for
women than for men....see the introductory book by Ferraby as an example.
On the other hand, it could be worse. A fine is definitely not as bad as 100
lashes!
Dear Melissa,
The above example is only valid when the marriage was conditioned on virginity.
A fine does not have to be paid, the dowry simply has to be given back,
according to Synopsis and Codification of the Aqdas. Furthermore it is said that
to conceal this matter (discovering the woman is no virgin anymore) is highly
meritorious in the sight of God.
I do not think God has a double standard on this matter. I think that the Bahai
faith is for many cultures and in many cultures virginity of a woman is very
important. I see it more like condescending to this fact, knowing that the Bahai
faith began at a period of transition for humanity.
Sorry, just wanted to clarify :)
janine
amsterdam, the netherlands
From 100725.315@compuserve.comThu Nov 30 18:40:06 1995
Date: 30 Nov 95 17:22:56 EST
From: sabredance <100725.315@compuserve.com>
To: talisman
Subject: Copy of: Open Letter to Rev. Moon
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
From: sabredance, 100725,315
TO: "Mark A. Foster", INTERNET:mfoster@tyrell.net
DATE: 30-11-95 22:54
RE: Copy of: Open Letter to Rev. Moon
<< Perhaps it can be a caution to us. What, I think, we see happening
on Talisman, as I think will be shown in this post, is a general social
trend - especially in religious movements. I have seen similar debates
on the Meher Baba list, the two Unification Church lists, and the Quaker
list. If we are to be about the business of building a New World Order,
then perhaps we ought to be cautious that we do not fall into the
cultural quick sand which has engulfed so much of the religious world.>>
Mark (Foster)
This is exactly what I have noticed too, on several lists of the Bahais, and in
the Bahai community. There are social trends going on, indicating that we as
humanity are all in a certain phase and that we are all struggling with the same
problems.
If people want to make a difference, and in order to get universal peace really
happening, we need to change our focus, our thoughts and our minds. The key is
unconditional love, i feel. And that involves feeling pain as well, however,
also great happiness. See also Henry Millers post of yesterday. No other thing
will work as powerful as unconditional love and acceptance of each other
(acceptance does not imply total agreement).
Failing all the time myself, yet trying,
janine
amsterdam, holland
From s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.eduThu Nov 30 18:40:28 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 16:40:17 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: Re: Qur'anic quote in Kitab-i-Iqan
Dear Donald and All,
I think the verse you quote comes after the statement regarding
two types of verses in the Quran: allegorical and fundamental.
The verse goes on to say that people want to interpret the
*allegorical* when only God and those who are knowledgeable
can only do this.
Anyway, I believe different translation of the Qur'an
treat the structure of the sentence differently: Pickthal's,
I believe, is the same as how Baha'u'llah wirtes in the
Iqan while Yusuf Ali breaks the sentence, starting a
new one with "Those grounded in knowledge...".
I am curious about a more thorough answer as well.
regards,
sAmAn
From PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.eduThu Nov 30 18:41:28 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 15:25:51 PST8PDT
From: "Eric D. Pierce"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: pawpaws and rutabagas/ Re: comparing apples to oranges
Bon Jour H.C. (and talismanians),
Your message lightened and warmed my heart.
Thanks for the charming and well thought out analysis of the
unfortunate "Singh Rathore" business. As an added note, the
situation was somewhat complicated by the fact that it is
possible to *forge* email, and if I recall correctly, at least
one of the recalcitrants in this matter indicated that nasty
private messages reportedly originating from them (and passed
on to others and/or posted to the list) were indeed forged.
Of course we have no way of knowing if something was forged or
not, and a false claim of forgery could be used as a smokescreen
if one wished to lie or cover one's tracks.
While I enjoyed the idiosyncratic and frequently humorous
(and possibly misunderstood) messages of our dear exasperated
Mr. Singh Rathore on this and the "SRB" Usenet group, I certainly
wouldn't expect there to be a wide lament about the loss of his
contribution to the discussion of scholarship here. I have no
interest in deflecting his opinions about the ill effects of
american culture, but would like to mention that it is very
problematic to directly impugn Persian culture in a forum whose
Persian members have probably been subject to racism and
nationalistic hostility from society at large.
Given that once again, the "facts" relating to a list expulsion
were not clear (and maybe never could have been), the valued
and tenderly held personal relationships between some of the
members who have been on the list longer than Mr. Singh
apparently took precendece over Mr. Singh Rathore's "rights" to
a fair hearing.
I am of course a typically utilitarian american, and have probably
come close to seeming rude in the rush to get on with "things"
here on talisman, perhaps at the expense of a proper civilized
valuation of cyber-relationships.
Best wishes for success and blessings in all your endeavors,
Eric D. Pierce
(PierceED@csus.edu)
Database Technician
California State University, Sacramento (USA)
> Date sent: 30 Nov 95 12:56:32 EST
> From: "H.C. deFlerier deCourcelles" <100735.2257@compuserve.com>
> To: Talisman
> Copies to: sabredance <100725.315@compuserve.com>,
> Madame Linda Walbridge
> Subject: comparing apples to oranges
> TO: Talisman, INTERNET: TALISMAN@INDIANA.EDU
>
> Re: comparing apples to oranges
>
> FROM: sabredance, INTERNET:100725.315@compuserve.com
> TO: talisman, INTERNET:TALISMAN@UCS.INDIANA.EDU
> DATE: 30-11-1995 01:06
>
> Re: re comparing apples to oranges
>
>
> > < >
> > please. Mr. Singh, no doubt, will find other company more suited to his
> > "humor."
> > t he was offending me, he would comply with my wishes. Mr. S. did not. >>
> >
> > Linda,
> >
> > Since you choose to reply to my personal post to you on talisman, i will do
> the
> > same, although i did not want to bore other talismanians with this.
> > There was simply no time for mr Singh to change his tone, because some of the
>
> I presume that this is a reference to the incidence that had been
> boiling over when I first started reading this newsgroup. If so, it seems to me
> that the Mr. Singh referred to above is actually Monsieur J.K.A. Singh-Rathore
> who apparently does not have access to this bandwidth.
>
... snip
>
> Paris Avec tres chaleureuses amities
> 30-nov-'95 H-C. de Flerier
>
>
From jrcole@umich.eduThu Nov 30 18:48:36 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:39:56 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: moonies
Mark: Thanks for this informative posting.
I don't draw the same conclusions from it as you do, though. Don't you
think it is a bit unfortunate that any Baha'is would *have* to be making
the same sort of human rights arguments that the poor Moonie liberals
(now that's a small and stubborn bunch!) do? Shouldn't the Revelation of
God for this age automatically have *higher* standards than an
ultra-rightwing authoritarian Korean sect?
There *are* problems in the Baha'i Faith just as there are in all
religions, in entering the age of human rights. Catholic human rights
activists have also questioned Catholic canon law. We are all human
beings here, striving to obey God's will. But that Will is for there to
be human rights, as I have shown over and over again from the Writings,
and where we fall short in that regard we must strive to do better.
And some of the striving is best done in the form of accomplishing
structural changes. Heartfelt calls for us all to be better human beings
are wonderful, but let's back them up with institutional and legal
improvements.
cheers Juan Cole, History, University of Michigan.
From Member1700@aol.comThu Nov 30 18:49:16 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:36:18 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: It's 3 O'Clock in the morning
Dear Jim:
Well, thank you very much for reply to my inquiry, which I must admit I
find just as mystifying as all the others. The message does come through
loud and clear that you don't like Talisman very much and that you hold most
of those who are posting here, particularly those interested in reforms in
Baha'i Administration, in utter contempt. One wonders why you keep reading.
In any case, you seem to be under the impression that we all spend our
lives (or at least our Baha'i lives) glued to computer screens bitching about
the Baha'i community. An odd notion. I suppose we could all list our
various services to the Faith, past and present. But that would be a little
self-serving, wouldn't it? I, at least, prefer to refrain.
But since you seem to feel that there is a magic formula which, if only
implemented, would instantaneously and completely transform the Baha'i
community--and perhaps the American nation (and the world?)--bypassing all
this messy human stuff . . . well, if you would be so kind as to let us
know what it is, I am sure we would be happy to try it.
Warmest,
Tony
From cbuck@ccs.carleton.caThu Nov 30 19:15:09 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 18:47:05 EST
From: Christopher Buck
To: "Stephen R. Friberg"
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: On review
Stephen Friberg thoughtfully writes:
___________________________________
For Baha'i academic publications, or Baha'i studies publications, I
believe that review should generally be required, but that the
review should be of an academic nature. There certainly should not
be waivers for those who have published more than three articles,
in my opinion. To do so would be depart from the nearly universal
standard for publication in scholarly journals: that regular articles
should always be subject to review.
____________________________________
To clarify, I was not suggesting that Baha'i academics be free
from peer review when submitting articles to academic journals, be
they secular or Baha'i-sponsored. I was merely suggesting that
*double-review*--as you have aptly characterized it--need not be
required of Baha'i academics after a finite number of reviews.
While Juan argues on the basis of professional ethics, I am
trying to find a pragmatic solution, one that strikes a compromise
between professional ethics and Baha'i administrative concerns.
Where Baha'i review and peer review do coincide is when an
author submits to the *Journal of Baha'i Studies*, because JBS
performs, in practice, an *in-house* review. Of course, none of the
reviewers, to the best of my knowledge, are non-Baha'i, and therein
lies the difference.
I believe that, short of total suspension of Baha'i review
for Baha'i academics--which is not likely to happen very soon--a
compromise ought to be considered. It is a compromise that will
satisfy neither the canons of professional ethics--which Juan has
convincingly argued--nor the safeguards required by Baha'i review. A
compromise, I suppose, is sort of like *kissing your sister* as us
ex-athletes used to be told what a *tie* was like in competition. But
such a compromise renders Baha'i review, in this special case, as the
temporary measure that it has always claimed to be.
Protection of the Faith is a fundamental principle of Baha'i
review. If, in the interests of protecting the Faith, we harm its
reputation along the way, then we are shooting ourselves in the foot.
The best way to protect the Faith against possible inaccuracies
written by Baha'i academics is to allow only peer review, and only for
a limited number of reviews. Ideally, we envision a time when no
review is necessary for Baha'i academics, who, of all people, have a
vested, professional interest in maintaining the highest standards of
accuracy, except in cases of bias, as is evident in certain cases of
scholarship on the Faith written by certain non-Baha'is.
Now that I appear to have enlisted your support for peer review
of Baha'i academic work, I hope that you will consider why a
compromise is perhaps the only pragmatic solution to the Mexican
standoff between professional ethics on the one hand, and a possibly
narrow view of protection of the Faith on the other. Baha'i academics
risk being scandalized by Baha'i review. Denis MacEoin has, in several
articles and rejoinders published in academic venues, publicly
scandalized Baha'i scholarship. My solution is far from ideal. It is
the kind of solution I might imagine my good friend and bosomless
buddy Robert Stockman to come up with, although I certainly cannot
speak for him nor can I make any presumptions concerning him. I
certainly invite Robert to weigh in on this proposal. I would not be
offended if he argued against it for compelling reasons. But before I
give up on this issue, I wonder if *reform* cannot be effected
incrementally in the form of a compromise?
Christopher Buck
**********************************************************************
* * * * * *
* * * Christopher Buck Invenire ducere est.
* * * Carleton University * * *
* * * Internet: CBuck@CCS.Carleton.CA * * *
* * * P O Box 77077 * Ottawa, Ontario * K1S 5N2 Canada * * *
* * * * * *
**********************************************************************
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzThu Nov 30 19:16:00 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 12:58:09 +1200
From: Robert Johnston
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: those who love and are gentle
ffolks,
A friend said to me yesterday that each time has its theme: the theme of
our parents was leaning about technology, the theme of today is learning
about relationships... Right or wrong, the observation stuck in my
head.... If it is true, we can expect to see an increasing validation of
relationship skills: a person with relationship skills will be considered
wealthy - just as has been the astronaut or the brain surgeon...
I have recently manifested a severe shortfall in this area, as many of you
will know... (Already I can hear my personal trainer Stephen Friberg
grimmacing at the self-flagellatory mood I appear to be in)... and I do
not wish to present myself now as being a born-again S.N.A.G. (Sensitive
New Age Guy) let a alone a latter day Saul tossed from his Donkey on the
road to Damascus to sping forth in a miraculously sancified form -- but
there is a new thought that I'd like to share...and that is this...
those who love and are gentle are the true pillars of the world...
If you don't know what I mean, read the letters of the Talisman women...
like Joan's to Dan, or the exchange between Linda and Janine. Among the
men, read the exchange between Farzin and Brent... but I must especially
emphasise the perspective of women...
When I was in the midst of my troubles, the other day, I received a private
letter from a Talisffolk woman. The letter was like a lightening rod
(Curiously, Baha'u'llah uses the same image when writing of the Cause in
relation to the destruction world through technological excesses), and the
process of my disarmament received a real boost. Deftly and briefly, she
showed me the world through her eyes. SUCH a compassionate view.
It was not that the faults weren't seen. It is just that the pain beneath
the faults was more emphatically observed. The sense of the wrongdoings
of the "other" was reduced, and the sense of good was highlighted. ...
hmmm, let's see: from this perspective an excessively loud complainer about
the way institutions function (and this is MY example, and my imperfect
interpretation of this woman's vision) might be viewed pretty much the way
I'd view a certain sort of drunken stand-up-and-tell-it-like-is poet (a
Dylan Thomas and Allan Ginsberg hybrid, perhaps), or a radical
preacher/politician. Gone is the sense of the betrayal of the station of
the scholarly "learned in el abha". The poet-preacher-politician exposing
his nerve to agnony is a dweller in the valley of love rather than the
valley of knowledge.
In this light, messages that disturb the convenantally conservative like
myself, become more like works of art manfesting William Blake's view that
energy is eternal delight. I hear Joe Cocker...bellowing...
But let me repeat my own poetic (ha, yes!) insight... those who love and
are gentle are the true pillars of the world.
Robert....
From: A US National Baha'i Center staffer
To:
Date: 95-11-29 12:48:22 EST
Are there people defending the actions as exactly carried out? I
wonder. I haven't heard that. People will from ignorance, yes.
, you say a lot can be learned. By whom? The British NSA may or
may not have learned its lesson from the event, but they haven't told
us, and they probably haven't learned anything from the Talisman
discussions (which, unless they are precisely accurate, will simply
muddle the issues, because people on the NSA will always be able to
say they don't understand). Other NSAs probably aren't learning
anything from Talisman, except that there is a bunch of angry
academics who feel everything institutions do is messed up. This will
make them suspicious of anything said on Talisman, and they will want
to ask the British NSA its opinion anyway. Individual Baha'is are
helpless to gather all the facts and simply must go on the facts
spread on Talisman; and Talisman, lately, has not been all light and
goodness. So where does that leave the friends? Wondering what
institutions have done or haven't done, and having no way of knowing.
That generates suspicion, either of the NSAs, or of the people posting
the information about the NSA Either way, the result is suspicion and
lack of trust. Communities cannot function when trust breaks down.
Do see where I am going with this: that a "free" discussion can end up
spreading misinformation and confusion and can do great harm to
individuals and to the communities they form? Think about it.
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduFri Dec 1 00:47:56 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 20:19:26 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: dancing or fencing (poem)
The angel of inspiration is dictating;
According to Webster,
sabre is: in fencing,
a type of weapon,
heavier than foil,
used with slashing,
as well as thrusting,
to strike,
to wound,
or kill with...
Blessings be upon
the dancers of PEACE,
adorned with weapons,
filling the screens
with acts of LOVE?
in a mysterious PLAY!
-lovingly and mystified,
quanta...(*_*)
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comFri Dec 1 00:53:14 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 18:11:26 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE . Baha'i Bill of Rights debate.
As the debate on the Baha'i Bill of Rights and Criminal Code keeps
flowing , I am looking at the varied postings and trying to obtain
some new information and I will post something substanial later .
However for the record , contrary to many statements , there is a
policy and procedure that the USA NSA always follows prior to the
removal of an Individual's full administrative rights .
A person does under goes due process . As a result rights can not be
removed upon a capricious personal whim . A person except in
extreme and rare cases receives 3 separate normally written
warnings. It is only in the case of persistent , flagrant violation of
Baha'i laws are rights removed . The reason there is a department of
Community affairs is to counsel and encourage in order a person
does not lose their privileges . In most cases that are brought to the
attention of the NSA when the person acknowledges their wrong-
doing no further action is taken . When action is taken for example
with a child molester or a person who commits spousal abuse . A
condition for the reinstatement of rights is that the person must
undergo therapy to help with that condition. I am sorry to say the
discussion has really missed the whole point . The vast majority of
removal of rights occur because of actions of a reprehensible
personal nature against the laws of our Faith and are done in a
Flagrant manner. Not because a person disagreed with an NSA
decision or an NSA member , it is really infantile to keep inferring
that and in certain cases stating it as fact .
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
From adrian.hindes@stonebow.otago.ac.nzFri Dec 1 00:54:42 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 15:28:15 +0600
From: Adrian Hindes
To: talisman
Subject: Bio
O Son of Justice
Wither can a lover go but to the land of his beloved,
and what seeker findeth rest away from his hearts desire.
To the true lover, reunion is life and seperation is death.
A myriad lives he would forsake to hasten to the abode of his beloved.
I'm in love with the revelation of Baha'u'llah. What more can be said? This
is not an intellectual speaking and these words should be ignored as
degenerate ramblings of a drunkard intoxicated with the wine of mystic
communion.
Once before becoming a Baha'i I became a hermit and meditated on the hills
above Aramoana. For 2 years I just sat and watched the wheels of human
endeavour turning. Then something welled up from within and said "enough!!,
its time to take your place in the world again". Why I was permitted to
have a momentary glimpse of Baha'u'llah a few months after my return is
still a mystery. Now as a Baha'i for six years I've just discovered Email.
For one week now Talisman letters have rolled off the screen and into the
trash can. Yet a few gems of wisdom, come wit have left a lasting
impression.
My academic qualifications are few. I'm a science graduate midway through a
medical degree at Otago University, New Zealand. Music, Christianity,
healing and Maoritonga are special interests of which I don't necessarily
have any knowledge of.So....perhaps some of us have a few things in common
and we can learn from each other.
adrian.hindes@stonebow.otago.ac.nz
From burlb@bmi.netFri Dec 1 00:55:09 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 19:44 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: Member1700@aol.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: It's 3 O'Clock in the morning
Tony, gleefully expressed the following verbal motif:
>there is a magic formula which, if only
>implemented, would instantaneously and completely transform the Baha'i
>community--and perhaps the American nation (and the world?)--bypassing all
>this messy human stuff . . . well, if you would be so kind as to let us
>know what it is, I am sure we would be happy to try it.
>
> Tony: the magic formula, if implemented, would do as you ask with the
results you describe...but it involves messy human transformation, striving,
dedication, etc. which you know, from experience, is so time consuming. I
earlier shared the Guardian's 3 point plan for shifting the balance of power
in America..like all plans, it must be implemented...and finding people who
are actually "happy" to try it, as opposed to begrudgingly not hampering its
progress, is the hardest part...or as Tom Petty sang: The waiting is the
hardest part....and Abdul-Baha is waiting, patiently waiting.
Burl (lines seem longer when you're alone) Barer
>
>
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From Alethinos@aol.comFri Dec 1 00:56:28 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 00:18:19 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: It's 3:00 in the a.m. and I am in your house Buba . . .
Tony:
My my my . . . aren't you the honey tongued one?! Are you always this
sweet, or did I catch you on a particularly gooooooood day, hmmmm?
Your post would have been excellent, had it been written by one of my
freshman college students . . . it was concise in its nastiness . . . and at
the same time did a wonderful job at misdirection, how do you do it?!
Let's see - you are, as usual you claim, baffled and perplexed by my post,
your confusion on par with someone trying to read the singles ads in Greek.
Yet somehow you were able to read INTO the letter all sort of stuff I never
said, nor implied, nor even hinted at . . . amazing.
I supposedly don't like Talisman very much, or at all. Where did I say
this? Forget your inference to my supposed underlying message - please show
me where I said this. Well let me save you the time Buckie. I didn't. As a
matter of fact I said the exact opposite today. Didn't catch that post huh?
Probably too busy trying to read between the lines. Get some glasses, you'll
need 'em.
And why yes, how astute of you to notice where I cleverly managed to trash
each and everyone here on Talisman. Incredible how you picked that one up . .
. damn I didn't even see that one.
And the magic formula I have . . . yah right! Like I'm gonna let that out
to just anyone! How did you know I had it? I tried so hard to diguise that .
. . I kept talking about the tests and trials we would all face in trying to
achieve the Vision of the Guardian, how difficult it would be to clearly
discern the problems that have so far held us back, and the courage we'd need
to overcome them and face an America that in many ways would oppose us. But
damn you're brilliant!! You saw through all the BS and realized it was a lie
on my part! You could see right through me and know I held the real answer!
And this without ever having spoken to me or laid eyes on me! Wow, I gotta
meet you man, you must be some spiritual giant!
Or a real ass. I am betting on door #2 here. You see your pathetic attempt
to be the *voice* for the list is one of the first things any lil' demagogue
tries. I have seen it on so many other lists. It rarely works. When it does
the list eventually collapses - people desert it left and right. Your attempt
wasn't even noteworthy for its snide craftiness. You patently have lied about
what I said. You took outrageous liberties in insinuating things I clearly
did not and would not have said. You have tried repeatedly to call into
question my mental health by suggesting that I rant, that my posts are
tortuous and lack any pattern of clear thinking.
DING! Thank you for playing LET'S SLAM 'EM! [tm] Tony but I am afraid
you've been eliminated in the first round! But we do have a wonderful
consolation prize right over here, just step this way . . .
If you can't run with the big dogs T. than you better stay on the porch.
You have not once tried to answer any of the points I have raised. You have
failed to show why striving for the Vision the Guardian and the Master laid
out for us is the _wrong_ way to go. You see that is what I am suggesting
here. Not once have I said that change (reform if you will) is not needed.
And if you had read carefully you would have seen that. Not once have I said
there is anything *wrong* _with_ Juan, Linda et al. I have objected to their
continuous complaining and attacks on the institutions - but hey, I have a
lot of reasons to be p.o.'d at the NSA etc too. But no amount of whining is
going to change the fundamental problems Buba - I mean that is what we tell
our children to expect with regard to those things not easily changed in
life, do we not? You do have kids don't you Tony?? If not run right out and
pick some up - WONDERFUL for slamming your face into the world of reality . .
From Member1700@aol.comFri Dec 1 00:56:42 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 00:45:10 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: It's 3:00 in the a.m.
Well, Jim, I am sorry to have offended you. I still cannot understand what
on earth you are talking about. But, since you are a big dog and I am not, I
guess I will stop trying. It only seems to upset you, anyway.
Warmest,
Tony
From mfoster@tyrell.netFri Dec 1 01:38:50 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 23:54:49 -0600 (CST)
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: moonies
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Hi, Juan -
Thanks for your thoughtful message. I agree that Martin's post was
informative. I happen to know him to some extent (though it was the
first time I have seen him post on this particular list) and have had
considerable correspondance with him - both through being on a few of
the same Internet lists and by participating in the on-going discussion
in the Unificationist folder on America Online. Actually, the two of us
get along very well. However, quite obviously, he is not much liked by
the top leadership of the Unification Movement.
You wrote:
J >I don't draw the same conclusions from it as you do, though. Don't you
J >think it is a bit unfortunate that any Baha'is would *have* to be making
J >the same sort of human rights arguments that the poor Moonie liberals
J >(now that's a small and stubborn bunch!) do? Shouldn't the Revelation of
J >God for this age automatically have *higher* standards than an
J >ultra-rightwing authoritarian Korean sect?
Yes, certainly. However, there are more of these _radically_ thinking
Unificationists than one might suppose, and they tend to be the
long-time members - those who have witnessed first-hand the alleged
abuses by "central figures" (a term used to refer to whoever is in some
supervisory capacity over other members). While Martin is among the most
controversial Unificationists in the U.S. (probably the world), he is
not alone. And the number of folks who think like him is growing rapidly.
To a great extent, Moon himself created this problem when he opened
his Unification Theological Seminary in Barrytown, New York, and
encouraged as many members as possible to attend. Since most of the
seminary faculty were *not* Unificationists, church members, often for the
first time, became exposed to a broad spectrum of Christian theological
approaches. The result was a liberalization in the thinking of many of
the most active Unificationists.
Likewise, I agree with you that there are problems in the Baha'i
community. However, such problems are, I feel, bounties. If we recognize
them as tests, they can be transformed into opportunities for learning
and growth.
Without mentioning any names, the American Baha'i community was
guided early on by some believers with strong authoritatarian
personalities. I have met a few elderly Baha'is who said that, although
these strong-willed individuals rendered invaluable services, they were
exceedingly difficult to get along with. Using the Guardian's distinction,
some of them may have been quite heroic but perhaps not too saintly.
Actually, earlier generations of the friends consisted of many such
persons. IMV, they were necesary for the growth of the Faith at that
time. Now, I think, we have reached a new stage where people possessing
that personality type are no longer as needed as before. However, making
significant changes are rarely uncomplicated and, as Ogburn showed,
culture lag is inevitable.
One of the indications that change has taken place, IMO, has been
the establishment of terms of service for members of the Continental
Boards of Counselors and their Auxiliary Boards. Getting an appointment
as an ABM used to, for all practical purposes, give one a life-time
position, and I would guess that, like me, you probably assumed that if
someone's service as an ABM were terminated, she or he must have done
something wrong. Now, it is often difficult to keep up with all the
changes in board membership.
Obviously, I agree with you that there are problems in the Baha'i
community - though we might not see eye to eye on what some of them are.
What I do feel, however, is that the best way to tackle these problems
is by loving (linking with) our administrative bodies - especially with
the Universal House of Justice.
If we feel that some particular problem needs to be addressed, then,
from my POV, the best course of action would be to write to the House
and then, as best we can, to let go of it - trusting implicitly in their
decision - regardless of whether we find it to our liking. While criticism
of present-day Baha'i policies on an Internet list may be cathartic and
intellectually stimulating, I question whether it will, in the long term,
be productive of changes in policy.
From my POV, our love for the Supreme Body should be so
all-encompassing, that, as we contemplate making some suggestion, our
only motivation should be to serve the needs and wishes of the House -
and not in order that a particular policy will be changed or reform
implemented.
With loving greetings to you,
Mark
__
From TLCULHANE@aol.comFri Dec 1 01:42:30 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 01:07:20 -0500
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Defense of America
Dear Stephen and all ,
Steve you asked if I thought my thought experiment was a patriotic song .
My goodness no ! It was meant as a description of how Bahai's teach in
America and why the population does not respond . It could also be read as a
pondering on pioneers to Japan and the manner in which not to teach .
To my friend Jim H. You are absolutely right that it is 3am and they are
crying in Bakersfield and Omaha . . and Bosnia and Indonesia and Brazil and
Cambodia and . . . You also wondered if i was naive or had a shallow
understanding . It is a fair question . I think people often assume because
of my mythopoetic ruminations or what I would call, folowing the Guardian " .
.a sane and intelligent patriotism " that I must be naive.
The America I love and embrace is an ideal and I embrace the pain of its
and the worlds history as well . That way lies redemption and transformation
as well .
A piece of biography : I am most certainly not naive about America or the
world . As a teenager I was involved in the anti war movement , spent a good
deal of time with the civil rights movement - for years I kept the blood
stained shirt from the beating a took by a policeman - and worked for five
years as a civilrights investigator for the State of South Dakota . I have
been shot at in combat situations and as I posted in Sept my recollection of
Viet nam 25 years later and my dear dear friend Dave from Houston I know
first hand the horrors of war . My mysticism is not an intellectual exercise
nor is it some version of Bahai pollyanna . As I said in my comments about
Dave, as he died in my arms , they lied when they said dead men dont speak .
So I will come out of the closet on this a little more .This is something I
have been reluctent to speak about . Nima encouraged me this past week end in
Austin so we can blame it on him . I have prayed with my friend Dave , more
than once, in the alam al mithal in the 25 years since his death . I consider
it one of Baha u llah's greatest gifts to me for the loss of my friend . I
have had occasions where every allusion and attachment I could imagine has
been stripped away or unveiled and all that remained in the midst of my
mental terror and grasping was Baha u llah and She would wrap me in a "Robe
of Light " and I dont mean I was dreaming . More on that if anyone is really
interested .
Now on to the subject at hand .
All my remarks need to be understood in the context of teaching and
living the Faith of Baha u llah in America and what is likely to work and
what is not . I have spent 24 years listening to variations of the old order
sucks or America sucks . I think the fruit of that understanding is evident .
It is a long path to nowhere . What follows is this puny mortals attempt to
make sense of being a Bahai at the edge of history and the 21st century .
The Defense :
Abdul Baha is reported to have said " The continent of America is in
the eyes of the one true God the land wherein the splendors of His light
shall be revealed , where the mysteries of His faith shall be unveiled ,
where the rightous will abide and the free assemble . . . For America has
developed powers and capacities greater than and more wonderful than other
nations . .It will lead all nations spiritually ."
For many years i have pondered this thought of Abdul Baha 's and
wondered what he had in mind and why he said it . A number of options come to
mind . I do not assume they exhaust all the possibilities just that these are
the ones I have heard and reflected upon .
1) Abdul Baha being an astute student of human affairs and master
salesman simply told the "people " what they wanted to hear . Pandered to
them if you will . I reject that interpretation .
2) Abdul Baha being old and not having been all that well traveled
around the globe was simply unaware of all the other magnificent locations on
the planet that apply equally to his characterization of America . I reject
that interpretation .
3) Abdul Baha being a wise philosopher and astute political ecomomist
recognized the potential financial and industrial power of America to shape
the world and hoped his Fathers message would tame and redirect the energy he
found in America. This would rebound to the benefit of humanity . I find
merit in this interpretation .
4) Abdul Baha being the Center of the Covenant and privy to the inner
vision of Baha u llah and the structure and nature of *Reality * recognized
( both intellectually and as Irfan ) that there were some things happening
in America that corresponded to his Father's vision. I agree with this
interpretation .
So what did Abdul Baha recognize?
He had after all been to England , France , Austria , Hungary , Egypt
and lived for years under the despotic yoke of Ottoman and Shia tyranny .
In 1912 America was experiencing the effects of a huge wave of
immigration . The peoples of the earth were present in America . Humanity in
all its glorious diversitywas here . The religious experience of Humanity was
also present . Virtually every known religion was resident in America by 1912
. The Christain Syrian Church the oldest in Christendom was established here
by 1920 . The East was truly "becoming" present in the West . As Abdul Baha
understood perfectly well that the pivot around which all the teachings of
Baha u llah revolved was the oneness of human kind ; he understood that human
kind was right here now .
In 1875 Abdul Baha Abdul Baha had written Secret of Divine Civilization
approving of a number what we might call liberal reforms . He had written
of religious freedom and political liberty . And lest we forget he spent his
entire adult life in a world where both of these were denied .
I think what he recognized was the potential of a democratic republic
to "lead all nations" once it took on the Irfan of His Father . He was
resent at the height of the Social Gospel movement in Christianity , he was
present for an American version of socialism heavily influenced by Christian
ethics . But most important he recognized that humanity in its ethnic and
religious diversity was present in America . It still is ! I believe he
understood that a nation which had as its founding document a statement
such as " We hold these truths to be self - evident that all men are created
equal , that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable
Rights, that among these are Life , Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" ;
that this was a nation grounded in the evolving structure of Reality. I
think he understood that democracy was in accord with his Father's vision .
Remember that at the time of the appearence of Abdul Baha there was a robust
public debate in this country about democracy , immigration, assimillation
versus pluralism . It was a public debate and one can find in his remarks in
PUP frequent references to the issues that were being discussed as part of
this public debate in newspapers , jounals and magazines of popular opinion .
He also undestood that America had not yet fulfilled the promise of the
Declaration of Independence . Yet here was a marvelous laboratory of humanity
with a political and social structure which made possible this debate and and
in which organized groups of, people where pressing forward with the promise
of the Declaration . It was both an ideal and a critique . And it still is !
He understood , as do I , that every evil known to humanity has been
perpetrated in America . It had raped ,pillaged and plundered people and the
earth just as had EVERY GROUP OF HUMAN BEINGS TO HAVE EVER LIVED ON THE
PLANET . So the sins of America evidently did not blind Abdul Baha to the
promise of America . This was and is a nation steeped in materialism , racism
and all manner of ills . It is also a nation steeped in a long tradition of
critiquing those same evils from both a religious and political standpoint.
Most importantly is was a nation ,at the time of Abdul Baha , engaed in
a debate about democracy not simply as a form of government but as a way of
life . And lo and behold their were intellectuals, political and religious
figures championing the capacity of ordinary people to participate in their
own governing . They were championing a capacity in the rank and file of
humanity to engage in what his Father called "Consultation". This belief in
ordinary people keep in mind was taking place at a time of very diverse
ethnic immigration to America . In short it was a belief in the capacity of
the members of the entire human race to participate in the creation of their
lives and society . It is and was about the oneness of humanity . And it is
and was right here in America .
There has been opposition throughout American history to fulfilling
the promise of the Declaration . That such opposition has existed is about as
much a proof of its lack of truth as opposition to Baha u llah constitutes
proof of the inapplicability of His vision.
What about that vision ? The vision of Baha u llah in my view is about
a marriage of Ibn Arabi and Thomas Jefferson . The Irfan of Ibn Arabi and the
Democracy of Jefferson . I believe Abdul Baha understood this perfectly well
based on interpretaion # 4 .
Baha u llah advocated the consultation of the people which presupposes
that such a human capacity exists among the generality of humankind . Baha u
llah advocated the primacy of agriculture . Baha u llah advocated that
craftsman / tradesman were to be treated with respect . In short the value of
honest labor or a variation on work is worship . All work that is performed
in the spirit of service; not simply certain kinds of work performed by
certain classes of people but the work of tradesman . Baha ullah advocated
religious liberty . Baha u llah advocated the seperation of church and state.
Baha u llah advocated the education of the masses and that the acquisition
of knowlwdge was incumbant upon everyone . Baha u llah abolished the social
role of the clergy , related to the point on education and acquisition of
knowledge . Baha u llah advocated that the material benefits of life were to
be extended to and made available to every human being . Baha u llah
advocated the equality of the sexes . Baha u llah prohibited the use of
alcohol and drugs . Baha u llah advocated that the means of livlihood be
available to all members of society that they might busy themselves with
their own concerns and not the concerns of others. Baha u llah advocated the
notion that a amns honor and dignity lay in " his knowledge , his upright
conduct , his praiseworthy character, his wisdom and not in his nationality
or rank ."
Each of the issues mentioned above has been passionately debated
throughout American history . Each of these issues was at the forfront of
debate in America at the time of Abdul Baha's presence . I believe he was
well aware of that and most impressed . One reason he could say "It will lead
all nations spiritually ."
Thomas Jefferson advocated the primacy of agriculture, known to us as
Jeffersons yeoman farmers . Jefferson advocated the value of tradesman and
craftsman; the dignity of honest labor not simply the labor of certain
aristocratic forms of work ( he like baha u llah were members of an
aristocratic class ) Jefferson advocated universal education and valued the
acquisition of knowledge considering its acquisition incumbant on a free
people . Jefferson advocated religious liberty . Jefferson foresaw the
abolition of the social role of the clergy . Jefferson advocated the
seperation of church and state. When one reads thru the multiple volumes of
the Adams - Jefferson correspondence as I have over the past 25 years
one is struck by the spiritual struggle to achieve *virtue* in a Republic
and the concern that mere gratification of material desires ( what we call
materialism) would overwhelm the dream of a visionary republic. I believe
Abdul Baha was aware of these links between the democratic vision of
Jefferson and the "Irfan Republic " vision of Baha u llah . I believe this is
another reason he said "It will lead all nations spiritually ."
What Baha u llah brings to America is the means by which the promise of
the Declaration can be redeemed and fulfilled . I believe that is why Abdul
Baha said " it wil lead all nations spiritually." What Baha u llah brings to
America is the Houses of Worship and the Houses of Justice the respective
centerpieces of two larger institutional complexes known as the Mashriqu l
Adhkar and the Administrative Order . The House of Worship stands as a
testimony to the Oneness of God ( tawhid) and the House of Justice stands as
as testimony to the Oneness of Humankind . These "twin " institutions are
meant to model the spiritual and political promise if the Declaration of
Independence in a multicultural nation and religiously pluralistic society
and planet. In short they are meant to "bear witness" to the Day of God -
not a theocracy but a theophanocracy- the outpouring of the Spirit into all
aspects of human life .
Baha u llah brings to America , like democracy, a Cause which " may not be
made a plaything of your idle fancies nor is it a field for the foolish and
faint of heart." Baha u llah brings to America a mandate to "adorn the
temple of dominion "- civil government- " with the ornament of justice " and
the "remembrance of your Lord" and the command to "bind the broken with the
hands of justice" and to "crush the opressor" . This is the role of civil
government . It is a role that still remains unfulfilled but that has
travelled a long way and accomplished much since its arisrocratic beginnings
two hundred years ago .
Baha u llah brings to America the statement "By the rightousness of God
! It is not our wish to lay hands on your kingdoms . Our mission is to seize
and possess the hearts of men . Upon them the eyes of Baha are fastened ."
And as Abdul baha understood perfectly well " In reality the radiant hearts
are the Mashriqu l Adhkar . . and that when the hearts find such an
attainment they will exert the utmost endeavor and energy in the building of
the Mashriqu l Adhkar ." This is the institution that stands as a testimony
to the Unity of God and before all else it is about God . It is about a
spiritual democracy , a Theophanocracy - the marriage if Irfan and democracy
. We have no clergy remember . We have no aristocrastic class remember . It
is about the Mashriqu l Adhkar both inwardly and outwardly . What America
needs is the Irfan of Baha u llah wedded to and in an intimate embrace with
the evolving democratic tradition of America . It is about the hearts and it
is first and foremost an affair of the heart . It is here in the microcosm of
humanity ethnically and religiously that is America where the vision of Baha
u llah for humanity can produce a model that " will lead all nations
spiritually." I believe that the future of the Baha i Faith in America, and
by extension of the world, lies in redeeming the promise of the Declaration "
we hold these truths to be self evident that all men ( Humankind- since they
are all here-) have been endowed by their CREATOR with certain inalienable
rights . ." It is about an Irfan Republic !
And I believe it is about fulfilling the command of Baha u llah to the
peoples of the world " Build ye Houses of worship throughout the lands in the
name of Him Who is the Lord of all religions . . " for " by His remembrance
the eye is cheered and the heart is filled with light." If the Bahai
community wants to be faithful to the covenant of Baha u llah and if it
intends to be a model to the world and redeem it ; that comunity had best get
busy with the process of seizing and possessing the hearts and the hearts
are we know the "Dawning Place " . It is in the hearts that lies the way to
transformation . It had best get busy with building houses of worship and
modeling the universal worship and service associated with that institution.
If the hearts are the mission of Baha u llah we ought not to look
elsewhere for redemption whether that be administration , rules , and
surely not exclusivist visions .
One of the great things about democracy that Josiah Royce and John Dewey
understood well was that in a democracy you could not demonize your opponents
.There are no and cannot be enemies in a democracy just as there are no
ememies in Ibn Arabi's and Baha u llahs Irfan . I must conclude that there
are and can be no ememies in an IRFAN REPUBLIC . I believe it is this
marriage that has been and will be the America for which I hold an endearing
" sane and intelligent patriotism." Royce and Dewey were making those
remarks BTW at the time Abdul Baha was visiting America . These great
philosphers of American democracy understood what Juan has called "standpoint
epistemology" . And it would seem Abdul Baha and Bahau llah understood it
quite well also .
This is the Faith that I teach the republic of Jefferson and the Irfan
of Baha u llah .
The Defense Rests : ( at least temporarilly :) )
I will now entertain the arguments of the prosecution . However please
dont assume Jeffersons contradictory actions on slavery invalidate his
position. I would then have to raise the issue of the position of
manifestations on this subject as well .
warm regards ,
Terry
From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpFri Dec 1 01:42:48 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 95 15:33:31 JST
From: "Stephen R. Friberg"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Defense of America
Dear Terry:
I have a problem with your posting. I agree! How can I offer new insight
and strong criticisms, and pungent remarks and all the trappings of oh so
critical whatever when I agree!
Now, if we could get you and Jim talking . . .
Seriously. If there is some points where you want critical discussion,
say so, and I'll concentrate my attention there.
Steve
From jrcole@umich.eduFri Dec 1 01:45:24 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 01:36:28 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: defending the Institutions
Jim: In our earlier discussions I came genuinely and deeply to admire
your spirit and devotion.
I really must object, however,to your saying that anyone on Talisman (and
you mentioned me in particular) has "attacked" the Institutions. This
sort of language is inflammatory and unfair and can do no good to any one.
I have over and over again expressed my love for and devotion to the
institutions ordained by Baha'u'llah. I admire the people who serve on
them for the time they take out of their private and professional lives,
and I know they do much good. Shall I name them again? Firuz
Kazemzadeh played a key role in having the US Congress pass the genocide
bill into law; Robert Henderson has been a powerful voice for ending
racism at a time when closet racism of the ban-affirmative-action sort
has reentered the mainstream of American political life; the Nelsons have
been key voices for justice for Middle Eastern Baha'is; I don't know
some of the other NSA members well enough to praise them properly. Shall
I go on, about how impressed I am with Hooper Dunbar, Hushmand Fatheazam
and other devoted souls in Haifa? With the many important policies of
the Universal House of Justice, from encouraging vocational schools in
the global South to working tirelessly for world peace?
I have criticized individual decisions or policies, it is true. But I
have not meant in any way to detract from the authority of these
institutions. I simply do not believe that blind obedience is mandated
in the Baha'i scriptures; it has to be obedience through understanding,
an obedience of conscience. Nor do I believe that discussing openly
certain decisions is an act of disloyalty. Rather, it is an opportunity
to improve the functioning of the community and of the institutions and
so to strengthen them both. Cyber-Consultation has arrived, and it has
been explicitly allowed by the Universal House of Justice.
Mainstream Baha'i culture is stiflingly paternalist. "The poor common
people would not understand criticism. It might undermine their faith."
This is why, apparently, all official Baha'i publications have to be full
of nothing but cheerleading. Cheerleading has its time and place, but
only and always cheerleading begins to breed certain problems that we now
see. Talisman is a more rough and tumble sort of world, where decisions
are subjected to scrutiny; reasons are asked for.
You can either write off most Americans (and most of them feel as I do
about wanting to be led by someone who can explain his policies and make
a case for them), or you can start *really* leading. You don't get
people's loyalty by enforced cheerleading, or by silencing them or
intimidating them or monitoring them or simply ordering them around. And
you have to be careful not to act in ways that appear arbitrary, lest you
undermine their trust.
So, I am quite happy to be led by the institutions. But their members do
have some responsibilities of the sort I have outlined. And they
shouldn't be so thinskinned as to over-react to every little quibble.
American intellectuals quibble all day about Washington, but the Right
appears rather solidly in control. It is much safer to let intellectuals
talk and critique than to alienate them as a class; if we go by
contemporary politics in democratic countries, they do not have a prayer
of being more than a minority voice anyway, at least for the foreseeable
future.
We are blessed in this Faith not to be ruled by a priestly class of the
sort that has so tyrannized some Christian and Muslim groups. We have
the basis for the first genuine religious democracy, as ordained by
Baha'u'llah (with, of course, an "aristocratic" heritage in the past in
the form of `Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effenci, and an "oligarchic" heritage
in the form of the Hands; but the present-day, actually-existing
institutions are elective or derive their authority from the elective
ones). But democracies require hard work. They can easily slide, as
with England under Thatcher, into elective dictatorships, or, as in the
US Congress, into plutocracies, or, as in India, into facades for an
entrenched elite. Our challenge as Baha'is, a challenge thrown down by
the Holy Figures themselves, is to have our institutions be "democratic
in their methods."
That's all I want, and all anyone on Talisman wants, and it is not an
attack on anyone. And if it can be achieved, then you will witness the
true efflorescence of the Baha'i Faith in America.
much love, Juan Cole
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduFri Dec 1 10:43:41 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 01:57:34 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: global therapy (poem)
Dear Jim and all:
Oh! my friend,
I saw my flaws,
looking at your mirror,
behind the veil.
Aha! that's the meaning of
reflective- global-therapy!
Yes!! the healing began.
Please! tell us more.
It's okay by me!
I'm listening
to all what you say,
according to your way.
Thank you,
please continue.
lovingly,
quanta...(*_*)
From burlb@bmi.netFri Dec 1 10:45:15 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 95 22:50 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Manifest Destiny
Forgive me for posting again so soon. However, I just read Mr. Harrison's
message regarding America's Spiritual Destiny.
I don't agree 100% with Jim about 2/3 of the audience tearing their garments
and rendering their fat when hearing the Advent of Divine Justice's words of
wisdom whispered in their collective tympanum.
I think the subject's reaction is determined to a significant extent by the
presentation. A confrontive wake-up call has the same effect as an alarm
clock -- it stimulates, but it alarms. The first response to the alarm
clock is to hit the snooze button.
A sunrise stimulates, awakens, and warms. Too often, I feel that we confuse
arousing the Baha'is from their slumber with shocking them from their sleep.
Having been aroused from my slumber in the more worldly sense, and being
shocked from my sleep as well, I can vouch for a significantly more
enpowering experience, and a definate sense of mission, when I have been
aroused by someone summoning me to fulfill an act of destiny for which I
feel a near Messianic zeal. Then again, were I jolted from my pillow by a
sharp switch to the behind and then confronted with a summoner holding a
basel thermometer in one hand and various charts, graphs, and manuals in the
other, stating cooly "You have not done it right yet" I would also wilt in
the manner Jim Harrison described with his lengthy post. [note: this type of
experience does not bother the British, who are quite used to it]
"At this exact time in history...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."
Universal House of Justice, 5/19/95
At the recent Menucha Winter School, we spent five hours on this topice and
we had *fun* and we laughed and we consulted and we looked for ways each of
us in our own sphere of life could win victories for the Faith by doing
exactly what the Guardian calls for us to do in Advent of Divine Justice.
The final hour was all about empowerment, a sense of mission, urgency, and
victory promises if we will but arise to greater heights of consecration to
the service of our beloved Cause. The purpose of all this was not to "make
them feel good about where they were" ( more frosted flakes for the soul
when it craves some hot cream of wheat) but rather to make them feel
wonderful about the adventure of transformation on which they have decided
to embark!
Of course, my approach is not everyone's 6-pack of Cola or bowl of granola.
and I may be too flip, too concise in my truncation of Shoghi Effendi's
prose when I cut to the chase -- but this is a long distance cross country
relay race and we are the short sprinters on the long and winding road to
the unfoldment of America's Spiritual Destiny.
Burl (who will try to not post for at least a few minutes, but I have
this...what others call a Rabbinical Standpoint or a Missionary Postition...
a Baha'i Perspective) Barer
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comFri Dec 1 10:57:21 1995
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 23:11:47 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT
To: Juan R Cole
Subject: Re: RE . Baha'i Bill of Rights debate.
You wrote:
> My dear Juan
The major thrust over the last two weeks is that there is no due
process . There is is the point I was making. What you are refering to
is exceptions to the process . I believe you need to be more precise
give me some facts and I will see , whether there is a case for in my
view that proceedure and due process is not being followed. You do not
have to give me names but of course if you do , it will go no furhter
than myself.In certain caes the NSA has to act in a speedy manner but
even then it has been my experience to take 4 to 5 months before the
persons rights were taken away.I can not see how a free speech matter
is an emergency as a matter of principle .
Warmest Regards
Derek
>
>
>Derek: I have rather good documentation on at least two cases where
the
>"due process" to which you referred was not followed, and which are
>clearly free speech cases.
>
>
>cheers Juan
>
From Alethinos@aol.comFri Dec 1 10:59:37 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 02:20:43 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: It's 3 O'Clock in the morning
Dear Farzin:
Thank you for the post. It always amazes me when anyone suggests a
*strong* course of action the first objections raised are ones that suggest
that somehow we will be running over people, leaving them behind, be
insensitive to their *needs* etc.
Odd that this never seemed to be a major issue for the Babis? I don't
mean to make light of things here - but really, these objections are the
first to be raised in every community - all the reasons *why* we can't *push*
things, or take a radical stand, or make waves, or stand up and be counted.
There is always this desire to hold everyone down. And so often it is
voiced in the terms you seem to be suggesting. I am not doubting your motives
here; I don't know you at all - it is just that I have heard so many similar
things from so many quarters in my 20 years as a Baha'i.
Odd that Abdu'l-Baha' never suggested to the American Baha'is that we be
sheep. Strange that the Guardian never said, in effect: "Well, what we really
need here in America is a radical departure from the cultural norms - we need
a new crop of dawn breakers, but hey, someone's liable to get run over in the
process, or get their feelings hurt so . . . well we better not risk it."
You know, this country which everyone that has been touting refoms loves
to hold up as a type of model - this country would never have come to be if
the Founding Fathers and a helluva lot of other people wern't willing to take
risks. Friends turned their backs on one another - because one wished for
freedom and had caught a glimmer of the Vision and the other could olny hold
on to dear old Mother England. Families were torn apart. people died.
No one said anything about stampeding over the weak, or those in the
minority. If we would all strive to truly act in the nature of the dawn
breakers, of the Master, then we would all be much better equiped to pick up
those who need a helping and protecting hand along the way.
Instead we play the now fashionable American game. "Oh my, if we do
_anything_ it may offend or upset _someone_." We're starting to sound more
like politicians every day.
But I will promise you this Farzin: I will be the first to stand over and
protect the rights of _any_ person who is assulted for any reason.
But there is a huge difference between injustice and socio-political
whims.
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From Alethinos@aol.comFri Dec 1 11:07:52 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 02:20:37 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: defending the Institutions
Juan:
While I certainly agree with much of your concerns regarding the
institutions in America (as you well know, since we have priv. discussed
them) I am afraid that is not the issue here.
I used the word *attack* because it is an accurate description of what
has been occurring here. And by this I mean exactly what I have already
stated - repeatedly - enough of the complaining. Enough of the citing of
individual cases of injustice. Enough of the suggestions for reforms - as
appropriate as many of them may be.
We know there are problems. And who the hell said anything about
cheerleading?? I can't stand cheerleaders. But that's a story Burl knows
about, anyway . . .
We, here on the list, are getting nowhere going on and on about the NSA
and the institutions and reforms etc. This _isn't_ the crux of the problem.
You all would have it believed, so it seems to me, that a few tweaks here and
there and it is smooth sailing.
Let's deal with the fundamental problems facing the community - those
that have held us in near check for so long. Let's deal with those and these
other problems will be dealt with by force of the Movement we create. Things
have not changed so far Juan because there is no _compelling_ reason for them
to change - everything is wonderfully status quo and has been kept that way
by various forces who wish it so. Read the Guardian and it becomes so clear
WHY we are in this condition now - why we have these problems - and what we
must do to deal with them.
Jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduFri Dec 1 11:08:31 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 00:29:37 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Robert Johnston
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: The Hands
Robert wrote:
> But let me repeat my own poetic (ha, yes!) insight... those who love and
> are gentle are the true pillars of the world.
Many of us have met Hands of the Cause. The kindest and most loving
people I've ever met were Faizi, Khadem, Muhajir... Yet, when Mr. Khadem
learned that the former Iranian consul general had moved next door to the
Bosch School and was wandering around the grounds (during the time just
after the Revolution, when he was very much persona non grata back in his
homeland) Mr. Khadem called all of us Bosch staff into the library and
gave the most marvelous talk on protection of the Faith I've ever heard.
Basically he talked about and demonstrated kindness and love, but that all
of that is over-ridden by the need to protect the Cause, and in those
days, the Iranian friends. So he said we should discourage the
association.
My question is this: Why in the Master's Will does He say "... the Hands
(pillars) of the Cause of God..." Is that an alternate reading of the word?
From TLCULHANE@aol.comFri Dec 1 11:09:53 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 02:43:30 -0500
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Sexuality/Community'Identity
Dear Friends,
Sorry to be days late in commenting on this but I have been out of town
and promised Stephen F. a defense of America .
I have been pondering the letter written on behalf of the Universal
House of Justice with regard to homosexuality . I found it balanced all in
all and was especialy pleased that it mentioned that Assemblys are not go
around prying into the lives of individuals .
The paragraph about the community being disgraced internally even if in
the eyes of the world it was not struck a cord with me . I understand the
theological and sociological principle involved here and agree with it. What
has always surprised me though is why this principle is referenced with
respect to sexuality . This is not something unique to Bahai's.
A few months ago our family moved to the central part of Omaha. I had
expected disparaging comments from some of my yuppie acquaintances as did my
children. We left a uppperincome section of the city for a middle income
section of the city . It is also a racially integrated area of Omaha . At a
recent Feast held jointly with members of surrounding communities some people
felt it appropriate to raise this issue during consultation . Why would the
Culhanes move to where they did after all this was a a part of the city home
to "Black people and Mexicans" . I was asked this on three seperate
occasions. If flagrant acts of homosexuality can be a disgrace to a
community why do we not have a letter that points out that flagrant acts of
racism are a disgrace to the community? Why would it be assumed that such
prejudiced speech - which is also an act - is not deserving of of the same
administrative sanctions . I thought the pivot of our faith was about the
oneness of humankind . Does this not stick at the heart of a Baha i communtiy
and disgrace it far more deeply than an act of flagrant homosexuality
whatever that is .?
I have also wondered why flagrant acts of materialism as conspicuous
consumption are
are not considered a disgrace to the communtiy . When people parade to
Feast or Holydays or Conferences in auto mobiles that cost more than the
majority of Americans earn in a year - not to mention the world- objects
which are clearly meant to be status symbols and to elevate some and make
distinctions based on material wealth, or dress in very expensive designer
clothing that is has no value from a quality standpoint but is meant to make
a status statement ; why is this not a disgrace to a community in which the
Founder disapproves of the pagentry of wealth and riches. Perhaps the
repeated pagentry of wealth at Bahai gatherings so clearly contrary to the
Bahai teachings should be subject to administrative sanctions .
I am wondering what is the dynamic that asumes that homosexuality is a
threat to the well being of the commmunity but does not seem to percieve the
same threat in gross materialism and racism ?
This "disgrace" statement seems to me to assume a context in which a true
community exists and there is not the neccesity for humn beings to hold to
less inclusive forms of identity. Such a community it seems to me would be
one in which a human being was "recognized" as first of all a spiritual being
and had the opportunity to " observe" the commandments of God in that
context of recognition . When such a community exists there may be a basis
for not supporting less inclusive forms of identity and a basis for disgrace
- that is the absence of the presence of Grace among a people . The most
disgraceful "act" I can imagine in a Bahai community is the demonizing of
another human being - the infidelity to the Great Covenant ; the opportunity
for every human being to hear and answer the call of the Beloved " AM I not
your Lord ? Yea . yea I testify that thou art ! "
Maybe this is what the source of true covenant breaking or lack of firmness
in the covenant is all about ; the denial , the non recognition of the
divinity in every human being.
One small thought I have with regard to sexuality and identity and
community is this . What would happen if Bahai community built its life
around recognition and observance as Baha u llah suggests in the Most Holy
Book . If all that community did for one year was focused on the soul of
every human being as a mirror of the beautific vision and recognized each
soul as what it is in reality a Mashriq u l Adhkar. During that same year the
dialogue and deepening centered around all the ordinances of God - which
pivot around the oneness of humankind - and not just on those related to
sexuality or personal status issues . My sense is we would as a community no
longer notice whether someone was gay or straight and those with varying\
\
orientations in this regard may not have to hold to them so strongly in order
to be recognized and have the opportunity to observe. If a human bings
identity is clearly as a "House of Worship " how important would the
identities growing out of our biology as ends in themselves become ? It
seems to me humans form less than universal community and identity when the
community around them does not recognize their humanity and allow the
observance of that humanity in service to humanity.
warm regards ,
Terry
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlFri Dec 1 11:12:10 1995
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 1995 10:42:36 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: from Sonja: customs
Re: meat eating African women:
Actually, Betty's first response was to say that every valley
or village has its own customs, so I then showed her your
posting where you did mention this applying to women in
EAST AFRICA.
If what you wrote was referring to just Kigezi, then there is
no problem, but you should have stated this in your
posting.
When I read this posting I was surprised at how sweeping
your statements were about something I was sure was not
so clear cut (this from my acquaintances in other East
African countries -not Uganda, and then Betty turned up
and I asked her.)
She not only found the idea funny but had never heard of
such a restriction for women in the villages that she has
visited - but she has since returned to Kampala so I can't
ask her any more- perhaps you can if you meet her.
Betty, is not only a lovely person, but a very perceptive
one, and who spent the last 2 years coordinating Women's
conferences in East Africa to build up a delegation of
women going to the Beijing conference.
I'm mentioning this not to prove how capable she is, but
that you and anyone else reading this may find it
interesting to know that she was one of the women behind
coordinating the various platforms/representations that
women from East Africa made, and she visited the UN
offices in New York early this year as part of this work.
While she was there, she also contacted the office for the
aadvancement of women at BIC, with the idea to
coordinate something at Beijgeng for the Bahais
collectively, but there was no interest in this idea. A great
pity I think, but I am sure this sort of response happens all
the time.
She was in the Netherlands this time at the invitation of the
dept of internal affairs.
>No, I didn't say that women
>everywhere in Africa don't eat meat,
But you said women in East Africa which is why I
responded. You'd be more aware of the vastness of these
countries than I.
I am not saying that you are not correct in saying that
women in general have poorer nuitrition than men. This is
the case in many countries around the world.
But what I found so difficult about this posting was that
you spoke of the diet of East African women as if this was
a rule that all lived by. And also the way you wrote about
it, gave me the feeling of someone looking from the outside
and making value judgements about what another culture is
doing, when I was not convinced that the facts that you
were sharing were such universal ones.
Not that there is anything wrong with this, and we are
always making value judgements about everything we
experience anyway -only that there is a danger of jumping\
\
to stereotypes.
Yes, you are right Betty doesn't live like a 'typical' poor
African women, but that doesn't disqualify her from being
an African women, nor being one who may know
something about their eating habits.
How are the art gallery and the artist workshops going?
much love,
Sonja
From Geocitizen@aol.comFri Dec 1 11:26:22 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 06:45:55 -0500
From: Geocitizen@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Destiny/America/Institutions
Esteemed denizens of the realm of Talisman,
My apologies for seeming to drop out of this discussion so often; there have
been interruptions in my access to email, and in my having time to read it.
Having spent at least four hours today getting partly caught up, and now
having just read the recent postings of Juan, Burl, Jim, and Terry, it seems
to me that we are closer -- in some ways -- to achieving a rudimentary form
of unity of thought on these issues than we have ever been before. Most of
us here certainly agree that if the Baha'i community of America fails to
undergo a significant transformation, it can achieve little of benefit even
to itself, much less to the generality of humankind.
Likewise, we generally agree on what the symptoms of this need for change
are: the stagnation of the community's numerical growth and internal
development, the stifling (whether intentional or not) of creative impulses
both in scholarship and in community activism, the repression of
insufficiently conformist individuals by both communities and institutions,
and so forth.
What I find encouraging is the latest near-breakthrough here on Talisman:
the beginning of grudging recognition that we really do agree on these
points. :) In fact, I submit to everyone involved in this discussion that
we are in greater agreement than some of us may realize -- a fact that is
frustrating to watch, as much of the "clash of differing opinions" seems to
illuminate little more with its "shining spark of truth" than the
infinitesimally subtle differences between six and half a dozen.
I hope I can be clearer now than I was the last time I brought this up, for
at that time the only response was what seemed to be a patronizing pat on the
head from Professor Cole, who clearly appreciated the measured tone of my
post but otherwise seemed to find little of interest in it, and dismissed its
central argument with a single-sentence explanation of how things are "in the
real world."
I am well aware that in the real world, and indeed even in our discussion of
America's spiritual destiny, there are definite differences that must be
worked out and cannot be sidestepped by a naive attempt to focus exclusively
on a few points of agreement. At the same time, the necessary hashing out of
these differences will be greatly facilitated if we can distinguish between
the differences that are *real* and those that are *illusionary.* To return
to my hard-working and humble metaphor, there is scant productive gain in
knowledge from debating the difference between six and half a dozen.
Certainly, such a debate may generate startlingly inspiring arguments, such
as Terry's spirited defense of America. As I read it, I was struck by the
beauty of its truths and of the strength of justified conviction behind it --
but I was also struck by the fact that, all in all, it ended up saying many
of the same things, and even with the same emphasis and priority, that had
been said by the supposed "attackers" of America, especially Jim. To
summarize, this argument is that America is a nation of great virtues which
are sadly clouded by great sicknesses, and that the proper approach to
healing this nation is to attack the sicknesses, not to attack the nation
itself.
In this exchange a powerful and critically important truth has been restated
by both sides as the central argument in what they seem to believe is a
disagreement between them. Is it naive to think that the holders of this
view could achieve more by working together on their vision, recognizing that
it is indeed the same vision and working out the differences of approach they
might have, than by declaring each other's visions erroneous?
The focus of the debate between Juan and others on one "side," and Burl, Jim,
and others on the other "side," is different and more complex, but a large
portion of the problem is still the same: there is an unrecognized degree of
agreement between the two "sides," and the failure to recognize that
agreement greatly hinders the constructive resolution of the very real
differences between them. On this subject I could and should write a great
deal more, but my alarm clock is set to go off just under 3 hours from now,
so I will try to hold my thoughts for expression in a more wakeful hour.
Now I will simply suggest to everyone involved in these discussions that a
conscious and explicit effort to recognize the points on which we are all
agreed might render far more productive our discussion of those points on
which we continue to differ, and perhaps allow us to more quickly find the
truths so sorely needed at this critical juncture in the development of our
beloved Faith.
with love and deep respect for all of you,
Kevin Haines
From Geocitizen@aol.comFri Dec 1 11:26:59 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 06:45:45 -0500
From: Geocitizen@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: It's 3:00 in the a.m.
In a message dated 95-12-01 00:47:07 EST, Tony writes:
>Well, Jim, I am sorry to have offended you. I still cannot understand what
>on earth you are talking about. But, since you are a big dog and I am not,
I
>guess I will stop trying. It only seems to upset you, anyway.
Perhaps, Tony, if you clearly *were* trying to understand, Jim would not be
offended.
Perhaps what has offended him is your seeming tendency to misread his
arguments in the worst possible light, and then to respond by composing
condescending, oversimplified, and inaccurate summaries of his statements,
concluding it all with a salutation that can only seem transparently
insincere after what has preceded it:
>Warmest,
>Tony
Of course, I can't read Jim's mind, but your recent approach to this
discussion has definitely offended me, and I was not even the direct target
of your method.
Likewise, I cannot read your mind, so I cannot know whether you intended to
be as unconstructive as you have been in this dialogue. So I have phrased
this as neutrally as I could, letting you know how your words come across,
and tried to leave out any unwarranted assumptions about your motives.
just offering another perspective,
Kevin
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduFri Dec 1 11:37:26 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 09:24:15 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: my turn to yell
Dear Jim,
You had your say, now it is my turn.
First, I'll tell you this, if, you ever came to a feast and any other
meeting around here and had a burst out like that you would be the
next person on talisman whining and writing fluffy things.
You are damn right I am gonna have a little tea-party and write
fluffy poetry and tell sad stories of oppression felt.
Hell! for twnty odd years I talked like you acted like you as I am
now. Then at times I served the best way I could. I raised hell on
committees (not bahai) about the issues you speak of. I made enemies
from the feminists, environmentalists, liberals and conservatists,
and been told that I fit nowhere. I was shunned for everyone for a
speech and reading "worshipping false profits." I had to pay for my
own copies as the committee said. I don't think even Ralph Nader
liked my questions about green bureaucracies. After I put myself
through school without a penny of assistance (I don't believe in
welfare) the only paid job I get is a temporary jerk.
But, everyone likes a volunteer spirited woman.
Sto, stop ruining my tea party and your poignant remarks of
fluffiness. How arrogant of your highness scholarliness.
Wish you a nice day with your pay, which is mostly likely better than
mine. How would you like to not see your mom, dad and brothers and
sisters for ten years, for wanting to sacrifice for the Faith?
As to backbiting. That explains the pains in my back. I wish
someone could bite a big chunk out of my right kidney and take out
the stone. I can't afford health-insurance.
bye friend (if you still are)
quanta...(*_*)
From MBOYER%UKANVM.BITNET@cmsa.Berkeley.EDUFri Dec 1 11:39:10 1995
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 95 09:08:51 CST
From: Milissa Boyer
To: Talisman.at.Indiana.edu@cayman.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: Re: sex and shame in the kitab-i-aqdas
Resent-Date: Fri, 01 Dec 95 09:17:41 CST
Resent-From: Milissa Boyer
Resent-To: talisman@indiana.edu
Hi Janine--
thanks for your insights and I understand the cultural context you were trying
to put it all into. I guess I perceive this as a Law that can only hurt women,
however. I mean, where is the equality? Can a marriage be annulled if the wife
discovers her husband wasn't a virgin? Granted the dowry part wouldn't apply,
but what about the invalidating the marriage part? And if it really is so great
in the eyes of God to conceal it, why have the Law in the first place?
Maybe I am being paranoid, but I can't see any equality or benefit to women
in this Law, so hopefully someone will point it out!
Thanks for responding!
Milissa Boyer
mboyer@ukanvm.cc.ukans.edu
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduFri Dec 1 11:40:06 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 95 09:41:54 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: little interruptions
Here I was in the midst of a lovely brawl with Jim, when I was interrupted by a
Widget story by Juan (to think he was on my Ph.D. advisory committee!),
interjected with literary interpretation by our dearly loved Derek (who was
even more dearly loved when he was on holiday). No, the "Donna" of the story
is not Linda Walbridge. Anyone who knows Linda Walbridge knows that she could
not tighten a widget to save her soul. You'll have to look more deeply at the
obscure "clues" in Juan's story, Derek (and we will all hope that Juan sticks
to writing detailed historical treatises.)
Then, there is the "limmerick" by Burl. Something about a woman named "Lin"
who is putting someone or something "in," but heck if I know what is going on.
Please, Burl, when these little moods overwhelm you, go help your wife with the
gardening.
However, thank heavens that Terry saved the day. Baha'u'llah is the "Irfan of
Ibn Arabi wedded to the Democracy of Jefferson." Words such as these must be
immortalized somewhere. As I was reading Terry's posting, I was exclaining,
"yes, yes, this is it!" I too love the ideals of America. Wedded to the high
moral standards that Baha'u'llah has set for us, what could work more
beautifully? Thank you, Terry.
Linda
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduFri Dec 1 11:40:42 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 95 10:04:46 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: a quick response
Dear Jim, I really don't want to be in a "lovely brawl" with you. I would just
like to say that, while I am also repulsed by moral depravity, gross
materialism, indifference to human suffering, etc., I don't think that this
need blind me to other issues that need to be addressed.
If one thinks about how religions develop and flourish in this world, he or she
sees that one of the most important ingredients is to give people the space and
trust to develop a full blown religious culture. This will mean that there
will have to be some religious syncretism - combining old religious forms that
have deep meaning to people with new forms. It will also mean giving people
the freedom to develop ideas and approaches to religion - through theology,
law, arts, scholarship of all sorts. When the artists, intellectuals, and
others complain of feeling constricted, when they feel that they must remain
silent to be "accepted," then there is something wrong. It is incumbent on
those to whom we have entrusted with the responsibilities of administrative
leadership to be alert and attentive to these complaints. It will only hurt
the religion if they are not. We are all in this together. Either we allow a
very broad net to encompass all of us or we so narrowly define ourselves that
we will be nothing but a little "ethnic/religious" enclave. It is up to us.
Linda
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 11:33:13 -0500
From:
To: jrcole@umich.edu
Subject: Re: Confidentially
Yes, I would expect X to be on the side of the enforcers. But I wonder
about a crackdown. I think we can just expect more of the same. Perhaps a
general letter from the House of Justice that is sort of anti-free-speech.
Do you think that they are actually planning to throw people out? I doubt
it.
But, I think that we should start arguing that trust in a community is
not created by silence, censorship, lack of information, and threats of
expulsion. It is created by openness and consultation and access to good
information.
Warmest,
From s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.eduFri Dec 1 12:01:14 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 10:39:59 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: Re: sex and shame in the kitab-i-aqdas
Dear Melissa,
Your wrote,
> Can a marriage be annulled if the wife
> discovers her husband wasn't a virgin?
I think so - the "mutandis mutatis" principle, I think,
can be applied here.
> Granted the dowry part wouldn't apply,
> but what about the invalidating the marriage part?
If the above holds, then yes.
> And if it really is so great
> in the eyes of God to conceal it, why have the Law in the first place?
I think this is an example of Baha'u'llah teaching us to be
moral, chaste on the one hand and not to judge others on the
other.
> Maybe I am being paranoid, but I can't see any equality or benefit to women
> in this Law, so hopefully someone will point it out!
>
I am not sure if I helped any.
take care,
sAmAn
From s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.eduFri Dec 1 12:01:27 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 10:51:33 -0600 (CST)
From: Saman Ahmadi
To: talisman
Subject: Consultation -> Baha'i Civil Discourse
Dear Friends,
What I am going to quote everyone knows but here goes
anyway:
Abdul Baha:
Two conditions for consultation:
1) Absolute love and harmony among the participants
2) Turning of faces towards God
Five rules of procedure:
"They must then proceed with
1) utmost devotion
2) courtesy
3) dignity
4) care
5) moderation
regards,
sAmAn
From alma@indirect.comFri Dec 1 15:25:32 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 10:23:08 -0700
From: alma@indirect.com
To: richs@microsoft.com, think@ucla.edu\
\
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Re: recently emailed anti-Baha'i file
Dear Rich,
I appreciate your concerns. But sometimes it is not practical to send a
file to those requesting it. In which case I would suggest that the header
should carry a warning such as 'Re: Whatever, WARNING contains CB materials'
Alma
At 06:47 PM 11/28/95 -0800, richs@microsoft.com wrote:
>Dear Safa and Friends,
>
>From: SAFA SADEGHPOUR[SMTP:think@ucla.edu]
>>It is under no conditions prohibited to forward or send
>>any message regardless of its content. Everyone has their
>>own right to read whatever pleases them to read.
>
>I think we need to identify two principles, here. First,
>sending and forwarding items to an e-mail list is rather
>like a broadcasting. There are those who are very sincerely
>trying to adhere to the guidance about covenant breaker
>material, and, when we are broadcasting messages, we
>should take their rights into account.
>
>This can be accomplished by saying "I have such-and-such
>material and will provide copies to anyone who requests."
>This allows us to satisfy the second principle: that people
>be allowed to read whatever they chose to read.
>
>One has no more right to inflict this material on others
>as others have to prevent one from reading the material
>if one chooses.
>
>
>Warmest Regards,
>Rick Schaut
>
>
>
To tread the path of Love Alma Engels
Is no mere game. alma@indirect.com
For only one
Out of many thousands
Can persevere in His Love. (Tahirih)
From alma@indirect.comFri Dec 1 15:26:57 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 10:23:02 -0700
From: alma@indirect.com
To: richs@microsoft.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: recently emailed anti-Baha'i file
Dear Rich,
A belated thanks to you and to those who privately emailed me on this
subject. You confirm and expand on what I had thought, that is we CAN read
these materials and distribute them if we choose though we are warned about
the spiritually corrosive nature of the contents.
In this world many things come with warnings such as check downloaded files
for viruses, the stove when lit is hot, etc. We protect infants and small
children from all dangers but there comes a time when one must decide for
oneself if the risk is worth the gain in such situations. And we must let
our children learn to make such decisions gradually. Otherwise they will be
ill prepared to make them when they reach an age where we no longer can
control them.
I asked these questions here because on another list the response was
similar to the outburst by one Talismanian here. Similar but not so
strident. Those there seem to want to take anyone with a 'name' in Baha'i
as an authority whose words are to be followed when they comment on
anything. I am not implying that these people do not have valid opinions
and express them with enough details so that those in attendance can form an
opinion to accept their judgement. But what happens is that they are cited
as an authority without any supporting data. This was evident in the
initial post which I included in my email. A vague reference to an Advisory
Board member is not sufficient in my opinion. (Having just finished an
episode with one who seemed dedicated but because he was new, fumbled [in my
opinion] the handling of the issue in that it took him three months to tell
me that there was no merit to associating my email forwarded to him with
infirmness in the covenant, I know that whatever infallibility and inerrancy
the UHJ may have, it does not filter down to lower levels of the
Administrative Order.) To her credit, the original emailer did send a
follow up giving sufficient details so that one could see that these were
indeed covenant breaker writings.
Again many thanks,
Alma
At 05:41 PM 11/28/95 -0800, richs@microsoft.com wrote:
>Dear Alma and Talizens,
>
>From: alma@indirect.com[SMTP:alma@indirect.com]
>>Now I have some questions for all ye learneds and not so learneds here.
>
>I'll try to answer your questions, but you should understand that
>these answers come from Rick Schaut and not from any institution
>of the Faith. There is some specific guidance available from the
>Universal House of Justice. If I don't see copies in the next day or
>so, I'll see if I can't find them.
>
>>1. Just what makes something 'covenant breaker material' as opposed to
>>plain vanila anti-Baha'i material?
>
>Any material which advances a claim made by a covenant breaker is
>covenant breaker material. (Well, not just _any_ claim, but a claim
>which runs counter to some provision of the Covenant.) For example,
>any material which argues that some individual should be regarded as
>the Guardian of the Faith would be covenant breaker material.
>
>>2. Just what makes someone a covenant breaker rather than simply someone
>>with an anti Baha'i point of view unless the Universal House of Justice has
>>declared that person has that status?
>
>The short answer to this question is "nothing." The House doesn't make
>the actual declaration (small technical matter), but any declaration is
>subject to the approval of the House.
>
>>3. What right does any Baha'i have to try to impose restrictions on other
>>Baha'is such as occur in the first email?
>
>I actually think there's a bit of miscommunication going on here. It's
>generally understood that reading covenant breaker material is very
>strongly discouraged. It is not, however, banned. There are some
>enemies of the Faith who will claim that some books have been
>banned, but this isn't true. (Indeed, some Baha'is have to read
>covenant breaker material in the course of carrying out their duties
>as members of one of the institutions, both elected and appointed.)
>
>When people, such as a member of the Auxiliary Board or a member
>of the National Spiritual Assembly, say that we should not read
>something because it's covenant breaker material, they are merely
>reiterating this rather strong message of discouragement. It's a
>case of "proceed at your own risk."
>
>
>We should be mindful that association with covenant breakers has
>been strictly prohibited by `Abdu'l-Baha. In unequivocal words, He
>has told us to shun them. This is, however, not the same thing as
>reading their material.
>
>
>Warmest Regards,
>Rick Schaut
>
>
To tread the path of Love Alma Engels
Is no mere game. alma@indirect.com
For only one
Out of many thousands
Can persevere in His Love. (Tahirih)
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduFri Dec 1 15:27:16 1995
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 12:41:32 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: it's not me, her or him
Whenever someone writes anything subjectively claiming objectivity,
then he/she should not come back and publicly say, "Oh! I did not mean
you Linda, Juan", etc.etc.. So, did you mean the rest of the people
on talisman? When you say it, own up to it. Or, don't say it at all.
I agree with all the issues you raise. I love making the comfortable
uncomfortable and giving comfort to those in discomfort too.
When you make qualifying statements you are taking a sniper approach
and if I see you on top of the roof, you bet I'll shoot you.
I'm a street smart kid, not a scholar or, fluffy poet.
lovingly not always gently,
quanta...(*_*)
From jrcole@umich.edu
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 1994 10:50:35 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: 70s youth exodus
I'd be interested in knowing from Rob and Richard whether they
think there was objectively an exodus of youth from the faith in
the late '70s. I was pioneering and so did not know about it
if so. My own suspicion is that the Baha'i faith is partially
a revolving door anyway; when we had thousands coming in
we had thousands going out. Still, the over-all size of the
community quadrupled in the 70s after having doubled in the
sixties, so someone stayed. Also, youth get older; I vaguely
remember that there were about 10,000 Baha'i youth in 1974,
and only 3,000 in 1979 when I got back from Beirut. But in
5 years the 17-year-olds were no longer youth. What is clear is
that Generation X wasn't nearly as interested in oriental
religions as had been the baby boomers. The nexus of the
Vietnam War, the draft, and the youth culture had produced
widespread alienation, as Paul says. That historical moment
ended and so did, with it, the impressive growth in Baha'i
numbers.
I am surprised to hear, also, that the Aqdas synopsis had
been greeted with dismay. I was studying it in Arabic by
1974 and was (and am) enthralled by it. But I admit that I
do read it differently than many American Baha'is. For instance,
I read the prophecy about the people ruling in Tehran as an
endorsement of popular sovereignty, and see LSAs as religious
bodies while parliaments are mandated as having their own
legitimate sphere. The Aqdas is in many ways a remarkably
democratic document to issue from a Prophet. Even the devolution
of vast areas of decision-making on consultative LSAs is quite
incredible. As if instead of leading the Jews in Sinai
Moses had said, `discuss among yourselves.' But since I went
to the MIddle East in 1974 and stayed there five years straight,
I am out of touch with what happened among the youth after the
great influx. cheers Juan
}
}
Return to Talisman
Translation Page
Baha'i Studies Page
J. Cole Home Page
Last Updated 5-1-97
WebMaster: Juan R.I. Cole
jrcole@umich.edu