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:

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