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