From CMathenge@aol.comFri Oct 27 10:49:16 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 01:00:03 -0400 From: CMathenge@aol.com To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Rock Music, Fundamentalism, Absurdity Dear Carl, Well, I can't speak for the Faith, and in fact I was quite saddened to hear of the self-righteous attitude of some communities towards teens who should have been encouraged to develop their talents within the community rather than outside it. But I have a 25-year-old son (Baha'i) who is in a group called "Justice Leeg," mostly Baha'i, and they have been performing in night spots around Los Angeles for the last year or so. They do a variety of current genres-- mostly those identified with what I would call the black youth culture-- hiphop, rap, etc., although the group of nine includes a mixture of ethnicities. They are coming out with a tape momentarily--as we speak I am told it awaits only the cover which is at the printer's. As far as I am aware, they have not been in any way discouraged by the Los Angeles LSA or the Baha'i communities in the area. I hope the Baha'i community is aware that they are making a lot of friends for the Faith and getting exposure in groups who might not otherwise notice its existence. (BTW, although I didn't intend a sales pitch, Michael has just now informed me the tape may be ordered by sending $10 plus $2 s&h to Justice Leeg, P.O. Box 1118, Lawndale, CA 90260. Personally I like Bach and Vivaldi [g].) Regards, Carmen From CMathenge@aol.comFri Oct 27 10:49:42 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 01:00:01 -0400 From: CMathenge@aol.com To: belove@sover.net, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Power vs power-over Dear Talismanians, In a message dated 95-10-20 09:38:37 EDT, belove@sover.net writes: >At times I speculate that the next Manifestation will not be a single >Man or Woman but will be a Couple. Then the rest of us can spend time >studying how they love and care for each other while at the same time >each being effective in the world. We would study their lives as we >now study the lives of the prophets. Well, actually we can do this with Baha'u'llah and Navvab, can we not? When I went on pilgrimage, one of my most memorable moments was when I visited Navvab's monument. I remembered all of her trials, how she made visits to the Siyyah Chal to take food to her Husband, even at great risk to herself and her children, how she sold all of her wedding treasures, even the buttons from her gown, to provide the bare essentials for that terrible journey over the mountains to Baghdad in the dead of winter, the death of baby during the period when Baha'u'llah was away in Sulamaniyyih, and how Mirza Yahya had the infant spirited away and would not even allow a proper burial, how she apparently suffered the actions of the covenant breakers over so many years with all possible kindness and patience, and how she was inconsolable at the death of the Purest Branch. It makes me cry to this day whenever I think of all the suffering she went through. . . I cried so much at her grave that my mother kept reassuring me that it was all allright now. Love, Carmen From CMathenge@aol.comFri Oct 27 10:49:58 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 01:00:00 -0400 From: CMathenge@aol.com To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Power Dear Talismanians, In a message dated 95-10-19 11:01:56 EDT, lua@sover.net (LuAnne Hightower) writes: >Joan wrote: > >>Second, what is the transition experience for people from a Power >>Over mentality, towards a Personal Power point of view? Are there others >>on this list who can help me understand what is necessary or what >>facilitates that transition? > >The transition experience involves learning to distinguish between the >Personal Power point of view and that of Power Over. There is a definite >felt sense of Power Over --- a sort of anxiety (adrenal rush, sympathetic >nervous system on standby, crisis mentality, competitive jolt) which is >always feared-based --- that we can begin to identify whenever it kicks in. >It is vastly distinct from the feeling we have when we are operating out of >love and from our most authentic or innermost being. A very good description--the Power Over point of view comes from being brainwashed with the belief that we are worthless and defective, which causes us to feel fear--fear of abandonment, fear of losing something or someone, fear of not being good enough--and so we unconsciously try to compensate for this by finding someone to be better than. Personal Power is more >a sense of who God meant us to be - it is only achieved through submission >to His Will. Yes, I think empowerment, on the other hand, comes from recognizing that one is *created* noble--we don't have to be better than anyone to be valuable, we are already born that way, and all we have to do is develop and maintain our focus on God (through the Manifestation) as our primary relationship and then follow whatever path reveals itself day by day--the "process" discussed in other posts. We must reach a point of willingness to have the disparity >between these states become painfully apparent to us. Once we reach that >willingness, there is no turning back. Once we act to embody His principles >- to change our waywardness, most of what we will see is exactly that - we >will be shown our lowliness, our faults, our small mindedness, our >judgements of others. This is a necessary step. It is all hard work to undo >the legacy of this popular American culture. Whew! Yes, indeed. > >If one hasn't the skills or support to embark on this journey without close >supervision, a skilled therapist is highly recommended. Marion Woodman's >works on "Conscious Feminity" are a great resource for building a dialogue >with these aspects of ourselves, as well as with our dreams and the world of >archetypes. Prayer is mandatory - as much as you can, take your lowliness >into the Presence of the All-Forgiving, the Most-Merciful and Compassionate. Marion Woodman is an excellent writer. I haven't read "Conscious Femininty," but I'll look for it. I guess her husband is a Baha'i--I noticed he had an article published in--what was it, Baha'i Studies Notebook or World Order? Anyway, I know she is an Anglican herself, but must be a friend of the Faith. With loving Baha'i greetings, Carmen From dpeden@imul.comFri Oct 27 10:50:15 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 95 08:04:54+030 From: Don PedenTo: talisman@indiana.edu I am enjoying with amusement the "debate" about copyright protocol on the Email. It must be born of a writers education and a scholars eye for detail. For God's Sake, please, if I should ever utter something wise enough to quote, or meaningful in any significant way, I'm sure that it must come from some other place than myself anyway, and please feel free to use it in any way positive that you can think of. Mention of my name not required. Does this fulfill a copyright protocol? Laughing, Bev. From Alethinos@aol.comFri Oct 27 10:56:23 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 01:27:40 -0400 From: Alethinos@aol.com To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: fundamentalism Juan writes at the end in a message dated 95-10-26 02:14:39 EDT: >Having critically examined the underpinnings of my philosophy of right on >a large number of occasions and over the course of 22 years, I have >concluded that many aspects of current Baha'i administrative practice and >belief are pernicious and desperately need to be reformed. Now what? >Those who have had these experiences and yet still cling to a theory of >Baha'i institutional inerrancy seem to me to be closer to courting the >epithet "fundamentalist," though why don't we avoid labels altogether and >give this word a rest? As much as I have remarked on this issue (with oddly enough no response from my usual cohort of concerned brothers and sisters) and despite David House's excellent reply I feel I should bring up a slightly different view here. As a community of people, with a common goal and a series of problems which seem at present nearly insurmountable (including this one) we need to ask what is the best way to deal with it. This does not seem to be the best way. We might wish to consider where such arguements/debates will take us. Our community is stagnant. We have not had significant enrollment for decades. We have no presence in the consciousness of America. We are a incestious community _at present_: AMERICAN BAHA'IS STAND AT CROSSROADS The American Baha'i Community, the leaven destined to leaven the whole, cannot hope, at this critical juncture in the fortunes of a struggling, perilously situated, spiritually moribund nation, to either escape the trials with which this nation is confronted, nor claim to be wholly immune from the evils that stain its character. (Citadel of Faith, page 127) It would seem that we are here constantly repeating in microcosom the same mistakes we see constantly repeated each day in the news, at our nation's capital and on tv talkshows. There is little doubt that this problem exists - I too have been a *victim* if we feel such a need for overused phrases to characterize our experiences. But here were are on Talisman, constantly bemoaning all the problems of our community - but there is no driving motivation behind solving the problems save for our own self-centered satisfaction. As if we are filled with some strange version of the disease of revenge . . . But it goes nowhere. We are not solving anything here folks. And we will _not_ solve them so long as we continue to realize that the only problems that immediately need to be solved are those that keep us from arising to fulfill the vision of America's spiritual destiny. In the movement to attain such an incredibly difficult goal we will be given and will find the power and wisdom to effectively deal with these problems. We will be guided by the Vision of the Guardian and the Master to see past these stumbling blocks and not only sweep them away but build up, truly, a beuatiful edifice in their place. We need to lift up our eyes and see that the only way out is to move forward. We cannot break from this prison by planning and bemoaning and conjecturing. We need to dig. We need to risk our lives to jump the evil jailors who hold us here. And I am not talking 'round-about for one more *glorious* teaching campaign. Good Lord that is the _last_ thing we need to hear about again. We need to offer up to America the opportunity to heal itself through the application of the Medicine we hold in our hands. We don't need to put together some pathetic imitation of an evangelical revival. Nor do we need to be a bunch of pot-bellied scholastics arguing the merits of the Law or how many angels can dance on the head of Burl if he holds real still . . . It isn't that many of these question are not important, and indeed vital to helping achieve this Vision of America - but the time is long past that we can afford to simply sit and talk about such things. We need to move down the road, and quickly and discuss it along the way. Decades have sped by and here we are . . . while windows of opportunity to really reach deep into America's psyche have opened and closed, opened again and slid shut. I can only hope it will open again and soon . . . and I can only wonder where we will find ourselves at the time. jim harrison Alethinos@aol.com From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comFri Oct 27 10:58:04 1995 Date: Thu, 26 Oct 95 23:10:01 -0400 From: Ahang Rabbani To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Hidden Words and mysticism [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII] Dear Jonah: You raised 3 insightful questions and while I think its best to allow those with proper learning and training to comment, in interest of keeping the conversation going, allow me a few words. > My first question: You write in your post that "He [Shoghi Effendi] > goes on to say, that he never translated any of the mystical > Writings of the Faith or commented on them." I assume that you are > excepting the Hidden Words, or do you not consider them mystical? On page 140 of God Passes By, Shoghi Effendi refers to the Hidden Words as having "unsurpassed pre-eminence among" the "ethical writings of the Author of Baha'i Dispensation". It seems that while the Hidden Words certainly have mystical dimensions, the beloved Guardian considered them as foundation of Baha'u'llah's moral and ethical teachings. > Two: You write that, regarding Baha'u'llah's mystical writings, "we > should have very limited expectation for our discoveries in them. > They are the sealed choice wine of our Dispensation." What do you > mean? That scholastic examination of these writings is nearly > fruitless? Or just that we can not "interpret" them? I certainly did not mean to imply anything that would stifle study of these Writings, including academic research in them. To a large degree my comment reflected my own frustration to discover new insights in these mystical Writings. For example, while there are a few new things that I've "learned" from the Seven Valley (beyond what's available in Attar's Conference of Birds), the most important of which is Baha'u'llah's rejection of wahdat-i wujud (existential monism) school of discourse, but to be honest I haven't learned that many *new* things. Does that mean that Baha'u'llah had nothing new to say? Most definitely not! Then, why can't I discern new insights? Well, I think mainly because I have no religious training whatsoever and its hard to take my Sunday school training and try to apply it to a work like the Seven Valley. But what of others? Why some of the great minds of the Cause (e.g. Mirza Abu'l-Fadl, Fadil Mazandarani, Ishraq-Khavari, Azizu'llah Misbah, Fazil-i Shirazi, etc.) also failed to note new insights and discoveries? In fact, there is almost nothing written on this subject in all these hundreds of volumes of Baha'i literature in Persian! There are not even a few mature essays on the subject. So, perhaps I'm not the only one. Hence, I'm becoming more and more convinced that Shoghi Effendi is right and perhaps such works are not really intended for this time. Maybe Baha'u'llah reveal them for another time and place, after proper interpretations were made available (by the future Manifestations of God?). A very learned Baha'i here in Houston is writing a massive book on the Seven Valley and in short all he's done is to identify similar themes and concepts in earlier Persian and Islamic literature. This seems too superficial. There has to be much greater gems of understanding in these Works which I can't see, and hence think its sealed choice wine. But as I said, this could be a reflection of my own ignorance than anything else. > Three: Do you, or does anyone, know of any significant discussion of > the Hidden Words besides those of Taherzadeh in _The Revelation of > Baha'u'llah_ or Diana Malouf's dissertation? By far, the best discussion of the Hidden Words is a book by Dr. Daryuish Ma'ani (of Austria), titled "Kanz-i Asrar" (The Treasury of Mysteries), over 300 pages. The first volume was published by German publishing trust in 1993 with subsequent volumes to come out soon (or perhaps the second one is already out). In my view, its several orders of magnitude better than the two items you mentioned -- but its in Persian. Perhaps someone in your community can assist in translating sections of it. This book is a great contribution to Baha'i scholarship and deserves more attention. Rumor has it that Fadil-i Tihrani (or was it Fadil-i Shirazi?) many years ago also wrote a massive commentary on the Hidden Words, but have never seen a copy nor any reference to it. Doubt its extant. Does anyone know anything about it? with best wishes, ahang. From burlb@bmi.netFri Oct 27 11:01:54 1995 Date: Thu, 26 Oct 95 23:17 PDT From: Burl Barer To: Ahang Rabbani Cc: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Holy Mariner! (was Next Manifestation) >OOOPS! Please forgive the false start on the previous message -- I hit a wrong key (e-mail flat). When I was a new Baha'i I went to Vancouver BC to see Shoghi Effendi's wife -- Hand of the Cause -- and had no idea what she looked like or anything. But I did have a question I wanted to ask her. Well, after her talk I was standing in the hall smoking a Camel (cigarette) and all of a sudden, there she was. So, not being too shy, I call out "Hey, lady!" I didn't know what else to call her, as I didn't know how to pronounce her name and I was not going to call her Mrs. Guardian. She came dashing right over all intensity and focused. "What is it?" "I'm new at this Baha'i business but I've been reading a lot of stuff. Have you ever read The Tablet of the Holy Mariner. You know the one I mean?" She looks at me as if my head is transparent and she's checking for signs of life in there. "Yes, go on.." "Well," says I puffing away, "I can't make heads or tails out of the thing and I was hoping maybe you could tell me what its about." "I know exactly what you mean," she asserted. "When the Beloved Guardian, Shoghi Effendi...you do know about Shoghi Effendi, don't you? (nodded affirmation from me) Well, at night he used to read to me from the writings of Baha'u'llah and talk about them and what they meant. But, to tell you the truth, I always perferred the more `nuts and bolts' writings. The mystical tablets and that sort of thing went right over my head, although the Guardian used to talk about them quite a bit and read them to me, but I didn't understand them all that well. So, I am not really the person to ask." So, I shrug. "But I'll tell you what," she says in that very solid way she has of saying very solid things, "when you see Mr. Faizi, ask him about it and he will sit you down and go through it with you line by line." Swell. Fat chance I'll see this Mr. Faizi guy. 1974: I find myself in an airport lobby with time to kill. Look! It is Hand of the Cause Mr. Faizi! There is an empty seat next to him in the little row of black plastic airport chairs. "Excuse me Mr. Faizi, but Rhuhiyah Khanum said that you would explain the Tablet of the Holy Mariner to me if I asked you to. Is that true?" "Why yes, of course," says Faizi in that sweet sweet voice, " sit down and I will go through it with you line by line." I sit down. He very casually reaches into his inside jacket pocket and pulls out a copy of the Table of the Holy Mariner! (don't you carry yours with you at all times?) I didn't retain so much about the details of the prophetic nature of the Tablet, which is what Mr. Faizi seemed to concentrate upon, as I was enraptured by the prophetic truth of the assurance that when I saw Mr. Faizi, he would go through it line by line. There may be nothing mystical about the experience -- she probably knew that he carried that Tablet around with him in his pocket just waiting for some gangly, gawky, American Baha'i to accost him for an explanation. :-) Burl ******************************************************* Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today! ******************************************************* From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzFri Oct 27 11:03:06 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 19:26:58 +1000 From: Robert Johnston To: Bud Polk , straz@itsa.ucsf.EDU, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Mental Illness and polarities: HA! Dear Bud and Katherine, I am delighted that you have both responded with spirit to my provocative letter. Here is my reply: (1) Bud. You wrote: >Robert, I tried consulting a shaman about my 27 year history of >bipolar disorder. He drummed, chanted and painted my body blue -- >then sent me on a vision quest. But I have had a little more >success with the "positivistic exaltation of the biologistic >technician," im my case a psychopharmacologist. I'll take lithium >and wellbutrin over drumming and chanting any day. Good for you Bud buddy! I didn't say that one should consult a shaman...but never mind. > >Perhaps a little closer reading of Seena's thoughts on genetic >triggers, twins, and biochemistry? The evidence is farily >substantial. Not substantial at all. The scant information that Seena provided would not even register as data in a respectable scientific study. There is a wide range of pretty interesting stuff that happens with twins. That it is all to do with biology is entirely speculative. Actually, I think that we will find that data provided by the study of monozygotic twins will be most useful in furnishing us with metaphysical rather than physical proofs. >I prefer a world with psychiatry to one without. Thirty or forty >years ago, I would have spent my life in an institution. Again my dear Bud, you seem to be content to infer far too much from too little evidence. Ever heard how much your nation spents of anti-depressants? I think it would blow your mind! A Solomon Islander Baha'i friend said that in the West we have failed to see [harmful] stress a disease. Now, this kind of stress leads to situations where people go crazy, and are prescribed drugs. God did not make His creation weak, therefore these kinds of matters must necessarily be dealt with primarily on [genuinely] psychological and cultural levels. I am not saying that the way that you are dealing with your condition isn't OK by the way. > >And a hearty ha! to you, my friend Lovely to find you in good humour! (11) Katherine: Your wrote: > >My husband is a psychiatrist and to my knowledge we have neither a big car (he drives an '83 dented Honda Accord, I get the '93 Accord because I drive the baby around) nor a big house (we live in an extremely small 2 bedroom apartment) nor overseas holidays...not one. >So. I don't know to whom you refer, other than to an unfortunate stereotype. It seems you have taken my metaphor rather too literally. My main point is to question the excessive use of drugs in the healing of mental disorders. I say that materialism is a root cause of of this situation, and that psychiatry is generally materialistic. Like Bud you appear to infer rather too much from your particular experience. Look at the life-style of the average 40 year old psychiatrist, and I'll bet you'll find that I am right, anyway! Wealth isn't bad if it isn't acquired unjustly. There may be good psychiatrists. I don't know. I'll bet your husband is. I drive a 1974 Hillman Hunter station wagon. Three of the valves are OK [just]. Robert. From burlb@bmi.netFri Oct 27 11:03:58 1995 Date: Thu, 26 Oct 95 23:35 PDT From: Burl Barer To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: fundamentalism Jim Harrison, just to see if I read his posts, wrote: " how many angels can dance on the head of Burl if he holds real still" Depends on their cultural traditions and the sexual implications of their dance. Besides, I don't hold still for much. Even if the veiled implication is that I am a pin-head, I am sharp enough to know that confirmations increase with movement and activity. If the angels are not dancing, we got a problem. Divine confirmation and assistance surround those that deliver the message, there are no assurances of confirmation for sitting still, remaining silent, waiting to see what happens (nothing) -- I am of the current conviction, and I believe it is becoming firm and unalterable, that we must be in process, in action, undertaking projects and bringing them to fruition constantly! If you want to get lit up, remember that there is no wick for the rested. Constantly proclaim, consistently speak of Baha'u'lah and who he is, deepen the newies and the oldies, praise effusively, encourage honestly, and *do things* -- Mr. Deeds Goes to Town. Bring it from the realm of thought to the realm of manifest reality. Don't wait for it to happen, be the conduit through which it does happen. And with that attitude, we can all sell a hell of a lot of Rainbow vacume cleaners! "The secret of success in teaching is no secret -- it is a victorious attitude" Burl (yeah, I know I just posted) Barer ******************************************************* Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today! ******************************************************* From cybrmage@niia.netFri Oct 27 11:05:10 1995 Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 17:38:31 +0000 From: Bud Polk To: Robert Johnston Cc: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Mental Illness and polarities: HA! redux On 27 Oct 95 at 19:26, Robert Johnston wrote: > Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 19:26:58 +1000 > To: cybrmage@niia.net (Bud Polk), straz@itsa.ucsf.EDU, talisman@indiana.edu > From: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Robert Johnston) > Subject: Re: Mental Illness and polarities: HA! > Dear Bud and [name removed, private post] > I am delighted that you have both responded > with > spirit to my provocative letter. Here is my reply: > > (1) Bud. > > You wrote: > > >Robert, I tried consulting a shaman about my 27 year history of > >bipolar disorder. He drummed, chanted and painted my body blue -- > >then sent me on a vision quest. But I have had a little more > >success with the "positivistic exaltation of the biologistic > >technician," im my case a psychopharmacologist. I'll take lithium > >and wellbutrin over drumming and chanting any day. > > Good for you Bud buddy! I didn't say that one should consult a > shaman...but never mind. > Robert, you did say (I paraphrase) the rise in mental illness was the result of psychiatrists replacing shamans and priests. By the way, that d**n blue paint didn't come off for months. > > > >Perhaps a little closer reading of Seena's thoughts on genetic > >triggers, twins, and biochemistry? The evidence is farily > >substantial. > > Not substantial at all. The scant information that Seena provided > would not even register as data in a respectable scientific study. > There is a wide range of pretty interesting stuff that happens with > twins. That it is all to do with biology is entirely speculative. > Actually, I think that we will find that data provided by the study > of monozygotic twins will be most useful in furnishing us with > metaphysical rather than physical proofs. Robert, I would say you infer far too little from far too much. The data from studies of monozygotic twins reared separately are not "metaphyscial," but compelling. The data regarding first-degree relatives of those with mood disorders are also powerful. I would be happy to forward a bibliography. > >I prefer a world with psychiatry to one without. Thirty or forty > >years ago, I would have spent my life in an institution. > > Again my dear Bud, you seem to be content to infer far too much from > too little evidence. Ever heard how much your nation spents of > anti-depressants? I think it would blow your mind! Again my dear Robert, you seem to be content to say too much while knowing too little. My father is an M.D. and a retired, high-level executive of a major U.S. pharmaceutical company. I know the industry and I am appalled, for example, that family doctors prescribe prozac, the new "happy" pill, by the bucketsful. That type of medication should only be prescribed by those qualified to diagnose and treat the serious mental illness for which it is intended. At the same time, I am grateful for modern pharmaceuticals, without which my life would be unending hell. > A Solomon Islander Baha'i friend said that in the West we have > failed to see [harmful] stress a disease. Now, this kind of stress > leads to situations where people go crazy, and are prescribed > drugs. God did not make His creation weak, therefore these kinds > of matters must necessarily be dealt with primarily on > [genuinely] psychological and cultural levels. With all due respect, it doesn't take a Solomon Islander (or a Baha'i) to know that. The holistic approach to mental health incorporates stress-relieving techniques. I practice exercises from yoga and tai chi. > I am not saying that the way that you are dealing with your > condition isn't OK by the way. My dear Robert, don't EVEN try. I would have you for breakfast. (But I am not Burl's "flesh-eating chairman.") And a double hearty ha! to you, my friend Lovely to find you in good humour also! Bud From belove@sover.netFri Oct 27 11:05:37 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 95 08:06:06 PDT From: belove@sover.net To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Mythopoeic (sic) By the way, there are two different words. One is mytho-poetic that has to do with something that is a mixture of myth and poetry. Mythopoetic is like mythopoesis and mythopoeic. I think it's pronounced mith-o-poi-yet'-tic. Mythopoeia has to do with the creation of myths. The mythopoeic movement has to do with becoming aware of the myths which create us and by which we live. The myths we readily identify as "myths" -- in quotes, meaning "somebody else's religion" -- are myths which have no mythic power. The one's which have nouminosity, spiritual power, are rarely identified as myth's per se. These are myths like, the Lone Cowboy, the story of Honest Abe rise to the presidency through hard work, for example. Mythopoeia is about the process by which such figures emerge. And, I think, the Men's mythopoetic movement, seeded by the work of Robert Bly, James Hillman, Michael Mead and many others, -- often lampooned and trivialized by references to drum beating -- had to do with the attempt by men to learn what myths shape us and then, to reshape or replace those myths with nobler ones. ------------------------------------- Name: Philip Belove E-mail: belove@sover.net Date: 10/27/95 Time: 08:06:06 This message was sent by Chameleon ------------------------------------- Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A. Einstein From Dave10018@aol.comFri Oct 27 12:04:43 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 11:46:06 -0400 From: Dave10018@aol.com To: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Mental Illness and polarities: HA! Robert, I have no time at present but this is just a note to say that you do not know what you are talking about. Speaking of polarities, you seem to accept an absolute distinction between physical and non-physical which doesn't accord with common sense or experience. Why shouldn't physical factors cause mental illness? LSD, Psylocibin, cocaine, heroin, alcohol all can cause temporary symptoms of mental illness and even trigger more lasting syndromes. ******************************************************* Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today! ******************************************************* But mainly, I wonder, how many schizophrenics have you seen both with and without their medications? I worked for a time in a community mental health center and have known many. How many manic -depressives? I am a manic depressive myself. My condition is relatively mild, which means my cycle is slow and I respond well to lithium. I do not consider myself a "victim" of anything, but I know because I have tried that without lithium I experience disabling delusional mania and then depression. If lithium had not beern made available to me in 1978, or , if like Robert Lowell I preferred alcohol to lithium, I would have spent much more time in mental hospitals than I have and sustained much more damage from the progress of the disease than medication(what did you say your name was?) has caused me. Yes the science is imperfect.The etiology of psychosis is poorly understood, and diagnosis is based entirely on history and observation and description of symptoms rather than objective physical data like blood tests, although physical anomalys have been detected. Worse, medication is less than ideal, especially for schizophrenia. And yes, medication by itself is never adequate to help ******************************************************* Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today! ******************************************************* someone recover from an illness which impacts the sufferer's experience of his or her own subjectivity and is thus a shattering experience. One of the first goals of such help, whether therapy or the assistance of friends and family, is always to help the person with mental illness to understand the need to take medication regularly to prevent the recurrence of disabling symptoms. Most of us learn the hard way. Some people find that with enough support they can continue to function although they hear voices et cetera. I have known people who have sought out the anti-psychiatry movement for this purpose. The medication for schizophrenia is, as I said, not satisfactory and has some very unfortunate side-effects. Some manic depressives feel they need their mania to be creative.(like Robert Lowell, who went into a mental hospital "for a rest" every spring for many years.) I think to learn how to be drunk without alcohol, to "merit the madness of love" is the essence of the work of poetry, the marriage of form and sense. But my practice involves taking my lithium because without it I am sooner or later overwhelmed by manic mental processes which interfere gravely with judgement in ways I can describe at another time. By the way, I like art with obscurity and complexity. Also I like advertising. your friend who pops pills, david taylor From jrcole@umich.eduMon Oct 30 10:26:49 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 12:03:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Juan R Cole To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: reforms The replies critiquing my post on fundamentalism continue to leave me with the question of "What then?" The popular Baha'i model in which one defers to the Institution for the sake of unity is fine for local communities. If a policy really is not working after a year or two it can be brought back up in Feast and reconsidered, and I think most LSA's are detached and mature enough to reconsider the policies they have set. These are largely face-to-face communities, with an average size of 40 persons, after all. But this model really does not work at the national or international level. There are several problems. First, there is not much of a way to have it borne in on an NSA or an international institution that a problem exists with current policy. Individual feast suggestions or letters can be dismissed as just that, individual. And who cares what one person thinks? Second, in some instances policies are good for some sectors of the community but bad for others. There is no obvious way to weigh and balance these matters at the national or international levels. In particular, there are some policies that are valued by some administrators (and in which they have a vested interest) but which are very bad for the rest of the community. In the latter case, the interests of the administrators always win out. Thus, it seems clear to virtually all Baha'i writers that Review would best be abolished immediately, and the Institutions should stop trying to interfere with what Baha'is write. But the control that Review and similar mechanisms give to the Institutions is valued by some high administrators, who selfishly keep it in place, to the vast detriment of the community. Another example of this phenomenon is the conscious decision the US NSA took in the '70s to close down the process of entry by troops in the Carolinas, simply because the Baha'i bureaucracy could not conveniently deal with it. (I myself suspect also that there were fears that a vast change in the electorate might well produce a new NSA). What is good for elected and appointed Baha'i officials is not always good for the community at large nor for specific sectors of it. Yet in the US there is no way for either the community or its constituencies to be heard. The NSA is guaranteed by the peculiarities of the electoral system virtual life incumbency; members' airfares are paid to attend conferences around the country so that they can be seen and stay in the public eye; salaries are paid to a varying number of NSA members, from three to five at any one time, and it is sometimes said that they will even be kept on retainer after retirement; and all this gives sitting members a set of material incentives to try to stay in power. Any criticism of NSA policy has even been branded by some NSA members as "negative campaigning"! No public accounting is given of NSA members' salaries and perquisites. Meanwhile, the National Teaching Committee is perennially underfunded, and relatively few of the community's national resources are put into teaching the Faith. The American Baha'i is run as a bland cheerleading organ for the NSA and its policies, despite the fact that the community at large pays for it with their contributions. No real news is allowed to appear in it, or any true debate over policies and their consequences (with the sole recent exception of the printing of one critical letter and a put-down of it, which is hardly a debate). Burl's call for constant teaching and activity is well-taken, but the current system stifles that activity among certain sectors of the community, most especially writers and social thinkers. I really wonder whether we should not go to a system where NSA members are banned from receiving salaries and perquisites, but where the executive secretary and the secretary for external affairs, etc., who have essentially full-time jobs, are *appointed*, extra-NSA posts with appropriate salaries and budgets. This would remove any material incentive for anyone to want to be an NSA member. Given that we have no nominations or campaigning, and the mathematics of a convention turning out any substantial number of sitting members are almost impossible, it seems to me that the only fair that sitting on the NSA be an unrewarding experience that no one would actually want. At the international level, I am worried that a convention is growing up that being brought as a Counsellor or in some other capacity to Haifa can be seen as a form of nomination for a seat on the Universal House of Justice, so that current House members may have undue influence on who is chosen. This process can lead to a clique of essentially like-minded persons ending up on the House; there have been no liberals since Ruhe, and there are now no native-born Americans (and America and Americans and "liberals" have started to be excoriated regularly). The system the Baha'is now have is not mysterious and it is not somehow perfect. It has sociological dynamics and it clearly has many serious flaws. We can, moreover, as a world community, change it if we desire. Or we could continue to stagnate intellectually and numerically in the US, content with overblown and exaggerated reports of conversions among peasants in the global South. Sincerely, Juan Cole, Department of History, University of Michigan From rstockman@usbnc.orgMon Oct 30 10:27:53 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 95 10:44:29 From: "Stockman, Robert" To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Scripture article My apologies to my frustrated fellow Talismanians that my article on scripture came out as gibberish. I thought I had convered it to ASCII, but all I had done was strip out most of the Word Perfect transliterations and fonts and saved the file as a Word Perfect file. Thank you, Eric, for translating it into ASCII. Unfortunately I did not fix all the transliterations, so some words came through garbled. Here is a list of the ones I spotted: * ruti* should be *sruti.* The s has an underdot. Bhagavad-Git should be Bhagavad-Gita. The a has a macron. Therav da is Theravada; the missing a has a macron Mah a y na is Mahayana; the missing "a's" have macrons on top of them. s tras is sutras; the u has a macron * di Sahib* is *Adi Sahib*; the A has a macron All of these are in paragraphs 3 and 4. I appreciate Juan's positive comments about the article but would urge everyone not to assume the encyclopedia won't be published. We have no idea what will happen. The Editorial Board (of which I am not a member) is still in communication with the House of Justice about the encyclopedia. They wisely are keeping the communications confidential until the issues (whatever they are) are resolved. If any drafts of encyclopedia articles are posted on Talisman, let us enjoy them and offer comments for their improvement, assuming that one way or another the good research that has been done will ultimately be of use to the Faith. As for the number of tablets, my recollection is that the 15,000 figure is now even higher, but I have not seen it in writing from the World Centre. I think the distinction to be made is between tablets for which the World Centre has *originals* and those for which they only have *copies.* Many individuals have kept the originals in the family and have sent in high-quality copies. The U.S. Archives has a few original tablets of Baha'u'llah as well--I think sent by Haifa once--and thousands of original tablets by `Abdu'l-Baha, for which Haifa only has high-quality copies. My recollection is that about half the tablets in Haifa are originals, and about half are copies. Perhaps the good staff in Haifa could confirm this information (if they dare even post that). -- Rob From jjensen@welchlink.welch.jhu.eduMon Oct 30 10:31:51 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 14:05:08 -0400 (EDT) From: "Joan L. Jensen" To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: reforms Dear Juan, Your posting was very valuable and provocative, and for me it foreshadows the types of criticisms that we are *all* going to get as the Faith continues to move out of obscurity and is more closely scrutinized by those who would be friends of the Faith as well as those who would be detractors. Talisman is a valuable forum for us to be able to think through answers to the issues you posted. > > I really wonder whether we should not go to a system where NSA members > are banned from receiving salaries and perquisites, but where the > executive secretary and the secretary for external affairs, etc., who > have essentially full-time jobs, are *appointed*, extra-NSA posts with > appropriate salaries and budgets. This would remove any material > incentive for anyone to want to be an NSA member. > It would also remove the ability of anyone who was not independently wealthy and who had a family to support, from being able to serve or to serve as fully. My guess is that the 'material rewards' for serving on the NSA are modest, and especially compared to the spiritual rewards of meeting with the friends, having time and resources to think about and explore spiritual solutions to problems, even [God forbid!] the thought that some members in some countries might like the appearance of power or authority that such a position confers. The issues are complex, and deserve frank and respectful discussion. I wonder what would be the best way to discuss the issues and find the balance between blunt honesty and preservation of unity. My guess is that we need to proceed slowly, building the trust between us that we will be able to handle these issues without crossing into any concerns of 'brinkmanship', and that as the easier concerns are addressed successfully, the more difficult ones will either solve themselves, the answers will become more evident, or we will have the courage and strength we need to address them in turn. Joan ------------------------------------------------------ Joan Jensen Baltimore, Maryland USA From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Oct 30 10:32:21 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 95 12:28:01 -0400 From: Ahang Rabbani To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: reforms [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII] I appreciate Juan Cole's posting on this subject. A question: > ... the mathematics of a convention turning out any substantial > number of sitting members are almost impossible ... Many times I've noted folks state that mathematically (or really statistically!) incumbency is guaranteed in Baha'i electoral system. But, you know, I have never seen anyone offering some statistical data to back it up. I'm not saying that it's not so, (the very fact that we have folks on US NSA since the time of Shaykh Ahmad is perhaps evidence enough!), I'm just asking for some hard statistical data. If anyone has collected some data, please share. As a professional statistician, I like to go over them and perhaps we can establish once and for all that in fact incumbency is built into the Baha'i system. Incidentally, if this data was previously posted and I missed it, my apologies. By the way, David and Terry, I'll try to write about Houston's disastrous experience with entry by troops little bit later. The bottom line is: teaching project is dead as a door nail and NSA members came down a couple of weeks ago to perform the burial service. More later. regards, ahang. From 72110.2126@compuserve.comMon Oct 30 10:33:55 1995 Date: 27 Oct 95 14:17:53 EDT From: David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com> To: Talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Justice Belongs to Us Dear Talismanians, David House's interesting post this morning led me down some strange and yet familiar corridors: "Like a child-King, these institutions are our rulers..." "Establishing justice is the exclusive purview of the institutions..." Can't really agree with either statement, but let's use them as a premise to begin the consultation, anyway. If the institutions are nascent, embryonic, child-like, whose job is it to help them grow? My own service on institutions indicates that the believers have that unenviable and signal task. It is the believers who are asked, time and again in the writings, to take their affairs, their cares and their concerns to the institutions, thus affording them the opportunity to flex their muscles and grow. If we have a child-King, it is our job to help that child mature. The Faith has long had a deep tradition of interaction and even substantial influence that passes between ruler and subject, from Manifestation to believer, and vice versa. I think we miss the point when we construct a dichotomy between the administration and ourselves. As such, the task of establishing justice falls to all of us, not just the institutions. If justice is to prevail in the world, we must first create it at the grass-roots level, in our service to humanity, in our stewardship of the poor, in our kindness and love for those who 'Abdu'l-Baha would have ministered to. As our vision of justice expands, then the institutions' vision can grow wider, too. So for me, establishing justice is not the exclusive purview of the institutions, but comes directly from the justly- lived lives of each and every individual Baha'i. In fact, to leave the establishment of justice to institutions guarantees its failure. Leaders can only mirror the moral and spiritual maturity of the population they are chosen from, after all. Which is why I'll also take issue with David Taylor's most recent post. While scholars and others here on Talisman certainly do bemoan the condition of our community, that ain't all they do. I personally know many Baha'is on this list who spend a lot more time in administrative work or community service or teaching than they do on Talisman. The two, I'd caution, are not exclusive. The most active and committed Baha'is I know are often the most vocal critics and reformers, too -- because they see and experience firsthand the child-like nature of our institutions and try to help in the maturation process. Love, David (unity in Daversity) Langness From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Oct 30 10:34:18 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 95 13:03:01 -0400 From: Ahang Rabbani To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Mental Illness [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII] My apologies to all for posting so much during the past two days. I have nothing useful to say on subject of mental health, just wanted to comment that we probably want to be a bit more careful with the tone of our discourse. Telling each other "You don't know what you're talking about!", even though we firmly believe it, is perhaps not the best comment on a semi-public forum. Also, I for one would take anything that a well-trained professional like Dr. Seena Fazel says on this subject very seriously and wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it. So, everyone, (myself included), let's try to practice Baha'i consultation. best wishes, ahang. From Member1700@aol.comMon Oct 30 10:34:34 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 14:27:13 -0400 From: Member1700@aol.com To: Talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Deep in the woods Warmest welcome to the many new Talismaniacs, and to returning prodigal children (Sheila?). The discussion does indeed have the potential to become richer. Some will be delighted to learn that Jackson Armstrong-Ingram is lurking somewhere abouts here. I was. Welcome to him, too. I was really touched and amazed that Cary felt safe enough here to share his pain and his dilemma with us. I sure don't feel that safe. But then, maybe I have very thin skin--and a lot more problems than he does. Warmest, Tony From Member1700@aol.comMon Oct 30 10:35:29 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 15:13:11 -0400 From: Member1700@aol.com To: Talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Encyclopedia articles I would second Payam's request to know what has happened to the Baha'i encyclopedia. I had heard a rumor of a reply from the House of Justice at the ABS conference. While I can't imagine them reversing themselves at this point, I wonder if their reply leaves any room for academic scholarship on the Faith within the Baha'i community. It does seem to me that the consequences of suppressing the encyclopedia are catastrophic. Virtually, every Baha'i scholar in the world has contributed to it, and they are all being told (in effect) that their work is unacceptable. Or at least, so it seems. It appears that there are contradictory forces at work in the community, and in Haifa. On one hand, we hear that scholarship is to be encouraged, and we are spending millions and millions of dollars to build a Center for the Study of the Text. We get signals that this center will network with scholars around the world, etc. Then on the other hand, the encyclopedia is censored on the silliest grounds of language and tone, and it appears that academic discourse is simply not going to be tolerated in relations to the Faith within the Baha'i community. Which is it? Anyway, I would like to know the encyclopedia outcome. The final suppression of this work will certainly mean that the academic study of the Faith will take place without the support and outside of the perview of the institutions of the Faith. What a pity! But, perhaps it is for the best. Tony From sdphelps@phoenix.Princeton.EDUMon Oct 30 10:36:09 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 15:15:01 -0400 (EDT) From: "Steven D. Phelps" To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: criticism Dear friends, Last week, I received an email from a friend saying that he had unsubscribed from Talisman because the postings were like "continual daggers in my soul". Having been a (silent) member of Talisman for some time, I can understand why he would say this. I realize that the critical nature of the discourse on Talisman has already been discussed a number of times, but his reaction moved me to offer you what is in my heart, at the risk of repeating what might have already been better expressed by others. I am sure that the criticism of the institutions has arisen from a deep love for the Faith and from a desire to see the transmuting influence of Baha'u'llah's Revelation take effect in the world. Some criticism is indeed essential, if our community is to surmount the obstacles that lie before it. May I submit, however, that the way in which it is expressed has a profound effect both on ourselves and on others. Negative criticism withers the life of the spirit and will ultimately bring our efforts to ruin. If we have a criticism of our community, or of the policies of our Local and National Assemblies, let us offer it in a positive manner, with a spirit of profound love and respect, and not in a way that undermines the confidence and enthusiasm of the friends. Yes, there are imperfections, because the Baha'is themselves are imperfect. However, let us not lose sight of the vision given to us by the Guardian, that the Administrative Order we are struggling to establish is the very nucleus and pattern of the future World Order of Baha'u'llah, and that it is the divinely ordained channel through which the spirit of the Cause flows to mankind. Talisman has a fantastic potential to advance the cause of Baha'i scholarship, to enrich the spiritual life of its participants, and thus to help us all "scatter the divine verses" to every continent. I hope that it will one day fully live up to this potential. Steven Phelps Graduate Student, Department of Physics Princeton University From rstockman@usbnc.orgMon Oct 30 10:39:54 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 95 13:48:55 From: "Stockman, Robert" To: talisman@indiana.edu, Juan R Cole Subject: Re: reforms I am afraid I disagree with Juan on several of the points he has made. <Subj: Justice Belongs to Us >Date: 95-10-27 14:24:54 EDT >From: 72110.2126@compuserve.com (David Langness) >Sender: owner-talisman@indiana.edu >To: Talisman@indiana.edu > >Dear Talismanians, > >David House's interesting post this morning led me down some strange and >yet familiar corridors: > > "Like a child-King, these institutions are our rulers..." > "Establishing justice is the exclusive purview of the > institutions..." >(snip,snip,snip!) >Which is why I'll also take issue with David Taylor's most recent post. >While scholars and others here on Talisman certainly do bemoan the >condition of our community, that ain't all they do. I personally know >many Baha'is on this list who spend a lot more time in administrative work >or community service or teaching than they do on Talisman. The two, I'd >caution, are not exclusive. The most active and committed Baha'is I know >are often the most vocal critics and reformers, too -- because they see >and experience firsthand the child-like nature of our institutions and >try to help in the maturation process. > >Love, > >David (unity in Daversity) Langness > > I am a bit confused!! I never said any such thing about scholars, critics or reformers. I wrote an overly long post to suggest the rule restricting membership on the House of Justice, whether changeable or not, might indeed be best understood as an arbitrary rule, an instance of patriarchal speech, and why such a way of looking at it might be a sensible way of looking at it( a way of thinking which leaves open some real problems which would be good to consider if anyone would touch on them) but this does not mean I am opposed to considering innovations. My point in part was that the whole tenor of the use of patriarchal symbolism in the Faith is that we see it as symbolic of the Divine but move away from letting men confuse themselves with the Divine! This goes for NSA's too. I do a lot of bemoaning myself and agree with much of the bemoaning that goes on here, including scholarly bemoaning. Also, I do not use pseudonyms and have no reason to doubt that David House is a real person, and believe me, he is not me! love, David Taylor ps: Aside from the strange cropping up in it of my name in connection with things I never said, I can find nothing in your post with which I do not strongly agree! From cbuck@ccs.carleton.caMon Oct 30 10:44:38 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 95 17:10:37 EDT From: Christopher Buck To: Talisman@indiana.edu Cc: Christopher Buck Subject: Journals & Dictionary Spellings In preparing a submission for an academic journal, I've had to contend with acceptable spellings of Baha'u'llah, Baha'i, and `Abdu'l-Baha, while getting away with the spelling of *Shoghi* which is problematic from the standpoint of transliteration. There are two choices facing the academic: (1) adopt spellings in accordance with the journal's transliteration conventions; or (2) adopt the spellings as lexicalized or otherwise attested in unabridged dictionaries. Current usage among Baha'is is not, ironically, considered authoritative for spelling purposes scholarly journals. Juan Cole used the spellings *Bahaullah* and *Bahai* for his important article, *Iranian Millenarianism and Democratic Thought in the 19th Century,* _International Journal of Middle East Studies_ 24.1 (Feb. 1992): 1-26. Due presumably to the lack of a dictionary alternative, `Abdu'l-Baha' had to be spelled *`Abd al-Baha'*. I faced the same dilemma. The best I could come up with is the spelling *Baha-ullah* under the lexical entry, *Baha'i* (Oxford English Dictionary [2nd edition] 1:885). I think these spellings are a little closer than Juan's, which were based on Webster, but, like Juan, I'm still stuck with *`Abd al-Baha'* (and I fudge on *Shoghi*--but that, after all, was how he spelled his name in English--even as far back as Oxford?) The spelling *Baha'u'llah* is really impossible to defend among today's academics. The best that could be hoped for is *Baha'ullah*. Which is why I endorse Robert Stockman's efforts to bring the standardized Baha'i spellings to the attention of lexicographers who work for the various dictionary projects. If anyone has found better spellings (with acutes or macrons or apostrophes in the right places), please post (with references). Christopher Buck ********************************************************************** * * * * * * * * * Christopher Buck * * * ********************************************************************** From jmenon@bcon.comMon Oct 30 10:45:35 1995 Date: 27 Oct 1995 22:37:46 GMT From: Jonathan Menon To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Ruhiyyih Khanum Hi everyone! I hope you all had a wonderful time in San Francisco. I just read Burl's exquisite message about his discussion with Ruhiyyih Khanum, and I just wanted to mention to everyone that she will be speaking in Toronto this coming Sunday. She is speaking at Convocation Hall, University of Toronto to about 2000 Baha'is from all over. If any of you happen to be in the area, come along. Doors open at 6:30 p.m., and the talk is supposed to start at 7:30. Given experience with the last time Khanum was in Toronto, I am going to start lining up at 4:00. Baha'is only. Baha'i ID required, or so I'm told. Best wishes, Jonathan From jmenon@bcon.comMon Oct 30 10:47:16 1995 Date: 27 Oct 1995 23:03:12 GMT From: Jonathan Menon To: rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.com Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Houston Hi Ahang, Please send me the details of Houston as well. I am extremely interested in all attempts at entry by troops--even if they fail. Of course, everything contributes to success in the long run. One point which I think reflects our misunderstanding of entry by troops is that as soon as a project starts to bring in significant numbers of new enrollments, everyone starts saying "They are having entry by troops." Most times this is not what is really happening, since entry by troops is not just about a whole bunch of people declaring in one project, but is a measure, I feel, of our ability to sustain those declarations, and maintain successful processes of consolidation which cause the growth to continue and get bigger. Entry by troops is a process which requires certain factors to be in place for it to be sustained. If it isn't sustained, then it's not entry by troops. My own understanding of what we are trying to do in Ontario (a province in Canada) is to try to understand what the different elements are, and then to put in place everything which is required, so that when a spark of new declarations takes place, the Ontario region will be equipped to fan the flames into a forest fire which will only grow, and never stop. The entry by troops compilation is, of course, our main reference. I am interested in finding out as much as I can about the plans and structures which achieved a certain amount of success in Houston, and what was missing, so we can learn from the experience. Take care, Jonathan From dhouse@cinsight.comMon Oct 30 10:47:40 1995 Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 11:03:34 -0700 From: "David W. House" To: Baha'i Announce Subject: Baha'is of Oregon Dear friends, The Baha'is of Oregon are in the midst of gathering e-mail addresses for the friends specifically in Oregon, and more generally for Baha'is in the NorthWest. If you live in these areas, we would appreciate it if you would send your name, real and e-mail address, the name of your local community, whether you are a member of an institution or committee (LSA, Aux Bd, STC, etc.) and whether you would be willing to pass information on to your community, insitution and/or committee. Please be fairly explicit about this. Our office keeps Baha'i membership and records information for the state of Oregon, and as a part of that service, we will be assisting in gathering and properly distributing these addresses. If you have some special wish for anonymity, please inform us when you send your e-mail address; all such restrictions will be scrupulously adhered to. Otherwise, we will assume that your address can be shared with Baha'i Institutions according to the guidance and instructions of the Oregon State Teaching Committee, as has been the case for physical addresses for the last decade. Please send the information to dhouse@cinsight.com ===================================================== Name: Physical address (including city, state, zip: phone # optional): e-mail address: Baha'i community of residence: Membership in committees, Institutions, et al: I am (able / not able) to share information with my (community / committee / Institution) (Please keep my address confidential. / My address can distributed by the OSTC) ===================================================== Thanks! God willing, we can use this information to assist in building a system of rapid information distribution and response. d. From forumbahai@es.co.nzMon Oct 30 10:48:57 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 95 13:05 GMT+1300 From: Alison & Steve Marshall To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Baha'i culture: two dreams In the last month or so, I have had two dreams that I think bear on the issue of Baha'i culture. First dream: I am in a lounge, attending an event akin to dawn prayers. Present are myself, and the family who occupy the house: mother, father, and their daughter and her fiancee. They are very unhappy because the daughter and fiancee turned up at the registry office the day before to marry, and, half way through the ceremony, the registrar suddenly arbitrarily decided he would not marry the couple. The family was distraught. I suggested that the registrar could not do that. He had acted outside his statutory powers and they should get his decision judicially reviewed. At that, they gave me a look as if to say that I had broken the covenant. The atmosphere in the room thickened and I cracked a joke to lift it: Just a bit of free legal advice! And so we got onto praying. The mother stood and, wailing, begged God to lift this terrible injustice. The prayer she had chosen reminded me of the intense prayers that were revealed for the martyrs. Second dream: I was in a bus. I travel in buses a lot, they are places where people obey strong conventions, especially those relating to personal space. Everybody in the bus was shoving horse manure in their mouths! Someone commented that it was real-rotted. I was thinking: this isn't human food, I'm not going to do this, this makes me sick. I imagined a beautiful, almost luminous carrot and remembered what human food was, and what the horse manure was really for! Love Alison -------------------------------------------------------------- Alison and Steve Marshall Email: forumbahai@es.co.nz -------------------------------------------------------------- From richs@microsoft.comMon Oct 30 10:51:55 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 17:16:05 -0700 From: Rick Schaut To: "'Eric D. Pierce'" , "talisman@INDIANA.EDU" Subject: RE: fundamentalism (coolness/alienation/Evil One) repost Dear Eric and Friends, From: Eric D. Pierce[SMTP:PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu] >My interpretation of the following quotation is that Baha'i >Administration ~done wrong~ results in: > "coolness and alienation that proceed from the Evil One". A rather astute interpretation. Were I sitting in a counsel chamber, I would have these quotes in mind. >If find that rather sobering considering the cavalier attitude we >seem to have about dysfunctional consultation. Has my attitude been cavalier? If I stand outside the counsel chamber, how am I to know whether or not a particular instance of consultation is dysfunctional? I understand the desire to come up with some structural way to improve the quality of consultation (or reduce the dysfunctionality). Yet, whenever I see such efforts, I cannot help but think of things like the following letter from Shoghi Effendi: 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.... 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 mature and the system will work better....... (1 November 1950 to an individual believer) This item is quoted in "ISSUES CONCERNING COMMUNITY FUNCTIONING, A memorandum prepared by the Research Department of the Universal House of Justice," the complete text of which has been posted to Talisman already. We are faced, then, with this juxtaposition between the voluminous quotes about the proper functioning of assemblies, the equally voluminous quotes about the duties of individuals in their relationships with these assemblies and Shoghi Effendi's assertion that the system is perfect (having been Divinely ordained). Are we to accept our own ideas and notions about governance, or are we to try to seek a deeper understanding and appreciation of the essential differences between this system and all of those which have failed in the past, or are failing now? If we are to understand this, we have to turn to the biological model advanced by the Universal House of Justice in _The Prosperity of Humankind_. The cells of the heart might begin to wonder if the brain stops functioning correctly, but they do keep living up to their own duties. Does the heart tell the brain to get its act together? The heart might tell the brain that it, the heart, is in distress. The heart doesn't tell the brain what to do or how to behave. As individuals, then, ours is not the task to keep pressing the institutions to behave as we would like them to behave. Ours is the task to support these institutions, to be thankful in adversity and generous in prosperity, to be long-suffering and to selflessly pursue our utmost and primary duty: to teach. Isn't this what `Abdu'l-Baha did; what `Abdu'l-Baha exhorted us to do? 'Course, if we want to, we can always stand on the corner and wail. I've never been very fond of my own wailing, so I don't think I'd want to put anyone else through it. Besides, I'd rather hear Hendrix wail. Warmest Regards, Rick Schaut From Member1700@aol.comMon Oct 30 10:52:27 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 20:27:13 -0400 From: Member1700@aol.com To: Talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Albania and former Soviet Territories Since my wife was recently in Albania, I can say that the progress of the Faith there has been truly extraordinary. There are about 13,000 Baha'is there now, since the country was opened three years ago. Many of them are doctors and other professionals. In one town, 23 out of the 24 doctors of the city became Baha'is! (Of course, this is a nominally Muslim country, with 70% of the population from Muslim background.) In former Soviet Territories, however, the Faith's performance has been dismal. There are less than three thousand Baha'is now in all such territories, and there are no large-scale conversions. Tony P.S. My Assembly is organizing a book drive to send (English) books and other materials to Albania on an emergency basis. Your contributions of books and money are welcome. From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduMon Oct 30 10:54:02 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 95 19:30:45 EWT From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Miss Manners speaks I hope that everyone noticed that my comments regarding Burl's table manners can be applied generally to his overall behavior. "Hey, lady!" indeed! Back to Miss Mildred's Finishing School, Burl. While I tend to lean towards Seena's and others' comments about the biological basis of severe mental illness, I don't think other factors can be discounted. When suicide rates increase in adolescence, can we give this a biochemical explanation. When alcoholism is higher in one country or area of a country than in others, can we simply talk biology? While I always felt uncomfortable with psychodynamic explanations for severe mental disorders, I also can't accept the fact that societal pressures and cultural patters (or disintegration) don't also play a role in mental disorders. However, having worked with patiets in mental hospitals, I am quite the proponent of medication. Behavior modification techniques might be helpful once a person is stabilized, but conventional psychotherapy just doesn't work in these cases. I am trying to decide at this moment whether to throw myself into the ring with Juan and Rob. Maybe I'll just put my big toe in a little way. Rob, while I might agree with you wholeheartedly on approaches to teaching, I suppose I disagree with you on just about every other issue. You keep chanting the refrain, "write to the House." You say that there are plenty of ways for individuals to be heard. Rob, those that are heard are those who are singing in harmony with the choir in Wilmette and Haifa. You make Juan seem like the Lone Ranger fighting against some fantacized evils. My perspective is so very different. I keep seeing good people drifting away because their voices are not in tune with Wilmette and Haifa. These are not evil, self- centered, radical people, Rob. They are normal human beings who see that things are terribly amiss. But they are labeled as "bad" because they disagree or dare to criticize. Rob, there is something terribly wrong with a system that makes people feel bad because they disagree and dare to speak of their disagreement. I don't know how you can possibly defend American Baha'i. Even as a new, terribly naive Baha'i I saw it as nothing more than a propoganda tool. The fact that we can't voice our complaints and concerns in that paper is disgraceful. One other comment. David House used the term "marji" when referring to the UHJ. (I hope I have this correct). John defined the term marji' in another posting. I would just like to add a couple of other points. Shi'a choose their marji'. Not all Shi'a follow the same one. Also, most will tell you that it is ridiculous to think that the marji' is infallible. The ones who are most adamant about the infallibility of the marji' are probably the ones that most Baha'is would care to avoid. They would be considered fanatics. It is those who try to follow their marji's teachings as closely as possible while recognizing that they must also use their own judgement in determining their behavior who strike me as the most balanced human beings. Certainly they are the ones that I most enjoy being around. Linda ------------ begin attachment #1 of 3 ------------- From: "Eric D. Pierce" To: talisman@indiana.edu Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 10:25:49 PST8PDT Subject: Re: (fwd) Regarding the implication of the term "rijal" & r Hi, : Please feel free to share my concern about "spill overs" from talisman : getting into srb [*] and their potential effect on its readership. *Usenet "soc.religion.bahai" newsgroup FYI (2 of 2). EP (PierceED@csus.edu) ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- From: khakim@asdg.enet.dec.com Date sent: Mon, 23 Oct 95 11:23:50 EDT To: pierceed@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu Copies to: khakim@asdg.enet.dec.com Subject: Re: (fwd) Regarding the implication of the term "rijal" & r Dear Eric Allah-u-Abha, >Very interesting analysis, thanks! Thank you. >There has been extensive discussion on the "talisman" email >list for a number of months, are you interested in getting >feedback from the authors of the banned "Service of Women" >paper that Alma was referring to? If so, I'll post your >message on talisman. Alma is going to send me a paper to read. Regretably, my participation in srb and other newsgroups does not leave any time for me to participate in the discussions of "talisman" group. >ps, I think that you may have misunderstood part of the >argument about the murky chronology of Abdu'l-Baha's >statements to Corrine True This is fine and I admit that might have misunderstood a part of the argument. >I have no opinion about that >issue, but wanted to mention that Tony Lee (Kalimat >Press) and Rob Stockman (National Center research office) >have been extensively arguing about the minutae of that >issue on talisman. This is fine and I am quite sure it is an interesting topic for Baha'is to discuss. However, I'd like to make an observation on this issue. The point to consider for those friends who subscribe to both talisman and srb is that it might be quite inappropriate to make "vague statements" in srb based on any issues discussed in talisman. Since srb is mainly a forum to discuss the Faith with those who have questions and address the Christian and Muslim, etc... misconceptions about the Faith. As a result sharing sporadic, unclear ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ and critical "spill overs" from the talisman with the readers of srb, in the ^^^^^^^^ name of offering another point of view, independent investigation of truth, etc..., does neither help the non-Baha'i readers of srb nor does it serve the best interest of the Faith. It simply confuses the non-Baha'is who are investigating the Faith and give more ammunition to the Muslims who find their classical criticisms to be nothing but childish arguments. After all Baha'u'llah says: "Not everything that a man knoweth can be disclosed, nor can everything that he can disclose be regarded as timely, nor can every timely utterance be considered as suited to the capacity of those who hear it" Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 176 Please note that I have no problem with someone presenting their views on srb and supporting them with the Writings. I hope the point I have raised here makes sense to you. Please feel free to share my concern about "spill overs" from talisman getting into srb and their potential effect on its readership. Warm regards, Kamran Hakim khakim@asdg.enet.dec.com ------------ end attachment #1 of 3 ------------- ------------ begin attachment #2 of 3 ------------- Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 19:15:03 -0400 From: NetProf@aol.com To: PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu Subject: Re: re: The Maiden and the Universal House... (disinformation?) Dear Eric: I have no problem with your message. Just that I am not aware that the House of Justice banned distribution of the paper re: women on the House of Justice. I got a letter from the National Spiritual Assembly asking me not to circulate it. Nonetheless, if anyone wants a copy, I will provide it to them. Love, Tony ------------ end attachment #2 of 3 ------------- ------------ begin attachment #3 of 3 ------------- Date: Sat, 22 Jul 95 18:44:59 EZT From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl Subject: service of women To: pierceed@csus.edu Dear eric, yes, I have a copy of 'the service of women on Bahai institutions' by Lee, Cole, Caton, et al.. and it is in a transmittable electronic form. However i feel obliged to ask the authors before giving anyone a copy, and that may take some time. The paper went with two others by myself, the first a theology of the guardianship setting out in general terms the station and limits of the guardianship, the second the foreword to the collection, drawing links between these general principles and applications in relations to the letters of the Guardian's secretary concerning women on the UHJ. My two papers were also banned, but I'm happy in principle to release them. Problem is they are not in a transmittable format - they are in an Apple page-setting program. It would take me some time to translate them or retype. regards Sen ------------ end attachment #3 of 3 ------------- From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Oct 30 11:04:36 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 95 20:13:01 -0400 From: Ahang Rabbani To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: longevity on NSA [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII] Dear Bill, Many thanks for your note. You wrote in part: > We could calculate the distribution of service times on the NSA > using a Kaplan Meier estimator. The difficulty is in what > should be considered as censoring. Obviously current members > would be censored at the time of length of their service. But, > what about those who die as members, are appointed to the > institution of the learned, or elected to the House of Justice. > And there are some members who had to resign because they left > the country, took a sabbatical or others who went pioneering. > ... the most difficult part of the calculation would be > collecting the data (which is always the case). We could start > in 1925, with what Shoghi Effendi indicated as the first NSA. I > assume we could get the names from the Baha'i News, American > Baha'is etc. The harder data is the censoring information based > upon whatever criteria was decided upon. I fully agree with everything you stated, and very much like you suggestion of KM estimator. If as you say, we had a rich database which showed the date of service and reason for termination of service then we would be in business. But short of that, I think someone (David Langness or Rob Stockman?) has already assembled a database of NSA's membership since its formation in 1925. We can just formulate the distribution of length of service on NSA. This should give us some basic information such as the mean-time of service, variability of length of service, outliers, etc. With these results in hand, one can then add a number of other fields to the database to define conditional distributions. Your example of right-censoring due to departure from NSA is excellent. Other factors such as, age at the time of election, race, gender, socioeconomic classification, etc., allow us to develop better models for predictions -- ie. developing a multivariate regression model. For example, then, one can see what is the expected length of service on NSA by, say, a white, middle class guy in his mid 30's. Or determine if there is difference in length of service between men or women, or among the races. This could be very interesting indeed! Which brings us to the question of DATA. Does anyone have any list or data to get us rolling? Surely someone must have put together a list of past NSA members with their years of service. So, brother, can you spare a data? take care, ahang. ps. Back in 1988, I put together a very interesting set of data on service of women on Baha'i institutions. For example, I had a table showing the number of female NSA members for *each* NSA for 1953-88, in 5 year intervals. I plotted the number of female Counsellors since 1968 when the office was created. And the number of female ABMs since 1954, etc. This last two items were divited by continents. It basically covered all the major institutions. Anyway, it clearly showed that the number of women serving on these institutions is really not increasing in any significant way and we are far from having equal representations. For example, the number of NSAs with *no* female members was stricking. But then there were 3 NSAs in 1988 with 7 female members -- poor fellows who served on these NSAs probably never got a word in! Anyway, if there is interest in this sort of thing, I can dig up my files and post some of these statistics. (I really should write a paper on it ... only if I wasn't so lazy ...) From rstockman@usbnc.orgMon Oct 30 11:05:57 1995 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 95 21:34:19 From: "Stockman, Robert" To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Miss Manners speaks Please excuse me for commenting about some specific statements by quoting them. It is just easier and faster. I'm glad we agree about teaching. I've been wanting to comment about teaching for months (not just to Talimanians; in general) and my posting was the opportunity. < To: 'Juan R Cole' , "talisman@INDIANA.EDU" Subject: RE: fundamentalism Dear Juan and Friends, From: Juan R Cole[SMTP:jrcole@umich.edu] >It has been proposed that the essence of fundamentalism is an >unwillingness or failure to examine critically the bases of one's >beliefs. It would be more accurate to call this failure the essential characteristic of fundamentalism. It is quite impossible to be a fundamentalist when one has relinquished one's death- grip on any single point of view. >It has been proposed that both the current functioning of Baha'i >institutions and any particular decisions they take should be given the >presumption of being in the right. It has? That's news to me. The proposal is: the decision of an institution is just if the decision is based upon principle. That is the basis upon which the Guardian rejected Louis Greggory's appeal of a decision of the US National Spiritual Assembly. This means, of course, that neither Rick Schaut, nor Juan Richardo Cole, nor Judge Dorothy Nelson, for that matter, is allowed to set his or her individual sense of justice against a decision of an institution so long as that institution's decision is based upon principle. >The problem with this formulation is that it is ahistorical and provides >no answer to the question of "what then?" No. The problem with this formulation is that it is a straw man. I understand your anger, Juan. In many ways I feel it too. Day in and day out, I see some of the brightest minds in the Baha'i World wasting away their talents on trying to convince themselves that they're right. Yet, the guidance from both Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice seems so abundantly clear, that I am at a loss to understand why it goes so blatantly unheaded. I have seen conclusions presented as if they were facts, and I have seen people reach conclusions about the motives of other human beings when the known facts can be reasonably explained under a presumption that the judged's motives were pure. This rush to judgement seems to be perfectly acceptable when the people we are judging are in positions of authority, but I have little doubt that a similar rush to judgement of those who are down-trodden or weak would be subject to the most vehement outcry. I'm sorry of I have been short. It's late, I have a cold, and I haven't had more than five hours of sleep in any of the past four nights. So, in a salute to Burl's call for action, let me leave you with the following words from the Will and Testament of `Abdu'l-Baha: "In these days, the most important of all things is the guidance of the nations and peoples of the world. Teaching the Cause is of utmost importance for it is the head corner-stone of the foundation itself. This wronged servant has spent his days and nights in promoting the Cause and urging the peoples to service. He rested not a moment, till the fame of the Cause of God was noised abroad in the world and the celestial strains from the Abha Kingdom roused the East and the West. The beloved of God must also follow the same example. This is the secret of faithfulness, this is the requirement of servitude to the Threshold of Baha! "The disciples of Christ forgot themselves and all earthly things, forsook all their cares and belongings, purged themselves of self and passion, and with absolute detachment scattered far and wide and engaged in calling the peoples of the world to the divine guidance; till at last they made the world another world, illumined the surface of the earth, and even to their last hour proved self-sacrificing in the pathway of that beloved One of God. Finally in various lands they suffered glorious martyrdom. Let them that are men of action follow in their footsteps!" Warmest Regards, Rick Schaut (`Abdu'l-Baha: Will and Testament, pages 10-11) From dpeden@imul.comMon Oct 30 11:10:49 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 95 10:15:31+030 From: Don Peden To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Fault finding Missions Dear Talispeople: I guess I lost something in the discussion. In terms of Assembly maturity, would someone please tell me what is gained by constant criticism? Or perhaps I am not understanding the term "criticism". Then again, not being terribly unique, I wonder how many of us do understand the term criticism, and then again, who gets to assign the definition? There is a difference between criticism and problem identification. It falls in the category of "intent", and manifests itself in "the delivery". Although our intent may be pure, our delivery leaves a bit to be learned. There are plenty of new ways which can be tried to put the Writings into practice in our communities, but "criticism" can only be destructive. Again, I am sure that no one on talisman wishes to handicap the assemblies, obviously, from your dialogue, you all wish the Faith to manifest its best...but folks, we ain't there yet! Teleporting is something from the Star Trek series, we haven't been able to invent it. But keep studying those mystical scriptures! I'm sure the key lies in there somewhere, and all those mathematical combinations are probably secret codes for the teleporting of our physical matter into an order which reflects our spiritual state (now there's a thought!) One case I would like to share was when I was serving as an Auxillary Board Assistant in Canada. I was "handed" an Assembly which wasn't functioning. My "mission impossible" was to get it functioning. I did a lot of listening, and realized that every member of that Assembly was a capable, loving individual, well deepened in the Writings, and each trying to serve as best they could. I'm sure that is a familiar picture all over the world. Each individual had their strengths, and their short comings (as I had my own, and felt completely inadequate for the job at hand). I was under constant pressure from well meaning fellow Assistants to "get them teaching; that will solve their problems". I chose to ignore the advice, because I just didn't see it as being the answer in this case. (Teaching, to my mind, is a product of joyful intercourse between individuals and the Writings. It is a natural by-product of a creative process.) Being very unsure of what to do, I asked them, "What do you think?". What came out was a series of events in which they were accused, abused, and left feeling paralyzed to do anything for fear of making "more" mistakes. As a result, they would often make decisions and deliver them in an "authoritarian" manner. I'm no psychologist, but I have been in the position enough times to recognize a defense mechanism when I see one. So, after consulting with the Auxillary Board member I served, the message I started to feed back to them was "You're okay; you're exactly where you should be in this stage of your development as an Assembly; mistakes are part of learning; what do you need as an Assembly; where is the next step?". That Assembly started to see itself in a different light, to claim their right to struggle and make decisions which also implied the acceptance of risk taking and making good decisions and decisions which would change and evolve as their experience and understanding changed and evolved. They claimed the right to be less than perfect...in "process", and the right to freely consult with the community, stating that the decision that they were making was an experiment, open to change and making a commitment to open dialogue with community members. If a community member got up at a feast and was critical of a decision, the Assembly members listened carefully, and the chairman of the Assembly would verbally confirm the validity of that person's concern, and invite that individual to attend the next Assembly meeting to discuss their ideas. It did not always result in an immediate change of the Assembly decision, but the individual did not feel put down, or belittled. AND IT WAS GENUINE LISTENING AND CONSULTATION THAT TOOK PLACE...NOT A FORM OF VERBAL MANIPULATION! Often they came away accepting that even if they didn't agree with the path chosen, they would follow it to see where it lead, and that their idea was duly noted for adaptation, implementation, etc. Also, this Assembly delegated everything they could, and kept a constant dialogue with the community members about progress or problems. They began their experiment by responding to a community request for a deepening on Marriage. We did not exclude those not registered as Baha'is, but made them welcome and part of the discussion. Using Fortress for Well Being, we went through quote by quote, taking the time to go round the circle and get comments from everyone, even if it was "no comment at this time". People felt free to engage or not, but the expectation of some participation was implicit. Two marriages were started on solid footing, two new declarations were received. This community became so confident and "centered" in their love and devotion, they were able to move out into their community and interact in a very genuine way with participating in interfaith functions, warm exchange with the clergy, the rabbis and the wickkens of our community, (not without its humorous moments) always looking and "dialoguing" with the positive in each. They never failed to introduce the Baha'i consultative principles into the dialogues (without attaching the name Baha'i; it was already recognized as being Baha'i because it came from the Baha'is) and having those principles unanimously and enthusiastically adopted instead of Roberts Rule of Order. They have been able to keep up with new additions (sometimes grumpy or contentious) to the community, and have struggled to ensure that their children and youth are growing in a loving environment within that community. I hope they continue to take chances. I'd like to point out that I did not do anything to achieve this...they did. All I did was say "It's okay, relax, don't beat yourself up. You're okay, and right on track for your development." The basis of encouragement is "to give courage" (taken from the dictionary of Bev). Why not? The worst that can happen is nothing. This was a small community, but does not the same principle apply to the National Spritual Assemblies, and even to the Universal House of Justice? Perhaps my understanding of the process is not complete, or even worse, naive. The Universal House of Justice is the final place to rest our hearts and spread out our concerns, and we often don't allow ourselves the time to absorb what they respond to us, and to experiment with its application. I wonder about our use of the word "committees". To my mind, it is a cop-out, usually fixing an image in our mind that "someone else is doing it". Perhaps a new designation which implies individuals who are catalysts, enabling others to function in certain areas is needed to help change our mind-set. We need a lot of collaboration between groups. And we need to do it without everyone suffering from what I call "Baha'i meeting syndrome". (Did I mention that I have a problem with large groups, crowds, and the hype of "meetings" of any kind?) Or perhaps the key is trying to identify what is the component which changes when numbers are increased (especially in communities where there are large influxes quickly.) I wonder about this attitude of "just teach and all will be fixed". Do we have the right application in mind? The right sequence of steps? I guess I'm rambling, but it is my personal opinion (and I do stress personal), that "criticism" leads no where. And I need to be one of the first to apply this principle in my life (here I am being critical of criticism...Catch 22). Even "constructive criticism" is often not taken as constructive, but can be damaging. Our institution need as much encouragement as we do to be able to feel confident to try, to grow, to make choices, to accept the consequences of those choices, to learn from the consequences, and to move on. We need to let go of our attachment to what we have been trained to think of as "constructive criticism", be it academic or other, and find a new line of questioning. (I know there is a month of Questions, but there is not a month of Criticism.) That questioning needs to be sensitive to the receptor. You don't put a 1000 watts through a 60 watt amplifier and expect it to function after. Our questioning needs to be sensitive to its receptors, and we are a world of delicate souls, with all kinds of protective walls around our hearts, and needing encouragement to "come out and play". With all due respect to the academic institutions of the world, so many disciplines seen to center around a process of "getting a new angle on something" and then "defending it" while other academics (advisory committees and such) try to poke holes in it to make sure that it stands up. Then you "defend" your tenure and claim to fame from new "upstarts" who are busy trying to change the status quo and make their name. Kind of a funny system, don't you think? I wonder if that is what Baha'u'llah had in mind for our supposed "Baha'i Universities". Don Quiote, move over and hand us all a new lance for the next windmill! I don't have answers, just questions. And maybe I am way off base in my assumptions about criticism. But what if there is a grain of truth to this idea? Is it not possible to use our collective knowledge and search for a new way of problem solving which does not involve criticism? There must be a way. What do we have to lose by looking? Think about it, please. As one delicate soul, I sure need some kindness when spoken to, or I disappear real fast. Listen to me! I should get a higher soap box. Never mind. After this little tirade, I had better think about the steps needed to re-instate my membership, roll up my sleeves, and do something. I wish I could tickle the place which is holding me back. I wish we were in a place where we could participate in a non-pressured deepening of some kind where someone would NOT ask me about baptism. I wish ostrichs could fly too...second thought, I'm grateful they don't...the droppings would be more than my windscreen could cope with. God knew what he was doing. I feel I am drawing closer, and I do thank Talisman for that. Love, Bev. P.S. Oh yeah! Introduction. I am an artist with no letters after my name, but a long trail of dripping paint, shredded and reassembled canvases and drawings, and bits of drying cellulose stuck to my elbows from the papermaking vat. I also have my car battery out on occassion to etch plates for printing on my "toy" press. Last week my business partner and I opened a framing business and artists gallery/craft shop in Kampala. If we don't go broke, it will be a lot of fun to be part of for the small time remaining to our family here. Don's contract will finished in April, and we are faced with job hunting and new opportunities. (He is a scientist in the discipline of research and development, agroforestry and related sciences, systems ecology, and supervision of graduate students. If any of you academics out there know of any job coming up, PLEASE let us know. I have to be pretty inovative in my approaches to my work because of restrictions on available materials and technology. It's a great challenge. I will never be famous, the Tate Gallery will never want to "collect me". I'm okay with that. My work is fair for the most part, full of colour, with a real gem of a canvas appearing about every two years. I believe strongly in cycles. For about the past two years I've been using the "classical" method of destroying an assembled work, and incorporating pieces of it into new work as it seems a fitting way of working considering my life: There is always a new understanding changing the old picture, and I need a new way of looking at things. So, by cutting up old work, gluing it on to new canvas, using it as a starting place, I'm always dissassemble/reassemble/dissassemble/reassemble). There has been some good work appearing lately. My main school has been the school of life. I can type because I was "programmed" in high school into the secretarial course, since this was "appropriate work for young ladies waiting to get married, and would carry us if our husband died without leaving us a fortune". (I have refused to do secretarial work since I married). It has been a great school, and I guess I'll always be in student mode. I've had brushes with University and an Art College for a year, and was greatly interested and inspired until the "programming" started. I kind of value the process of discovery, and don't like to be deprived of it. I'm probably dysfunctional when it comes to authority, but I don't worry about it too much...just one of those warts one lives with. We have lived in East Africa since 1978 with a three year soujourn back in Canada. Africa has opened my heart, and my heart belongs to Africa. I have learned about love here. I don't know what I'll do when we have to leave...I guess I'll just live with it, and grow from the separation. I'll go forward, I hope. (But, then again, I'll probably do my spiritual shuffle.) I have loved deeply, and been loved deeply. I am grateful. I have had the opportunity to be creative, and I am grateful. I have felt intense pain and grief, and I am grateful. I have had the opportunity of nursing and companioning a close friend to her death, and performing the final service of preparing her body for Baha'i burial. (A common experience here, but new to me.) And I am profoundly grateful. I'm a mother of four boys aged 11 years to 25. They are humans I am happy to have contributed to. They did not fulfill my dreams for them (they were suppose to be the perfect leaders of tomorrow and change our terrible war filled world). They are surpassing the limitations of my dreams by being their own selves as honestly as they can, and I am grateful. I've been married for twenty years to a wonderful man, full of love, compassion, encouragement, the willingness to struggle, a desire to learn, and the ability to say "sorry" and all the rest of these wonderful attributes we call human, including warts on his soul; I am grateful. I bear all the emotional scars of an abusive childhood, dysfunctional family and all that good stuff, and I am grateful. It has given my "roots and base trunk" wonderful twists and turns, knots and bumps which have given my character its "sculptural" form. I love my twisted side as much as my straight...it has created compassion. I have survived (thanks to wonderful friends) and moved forward (I hope). And I am grateful. I am not everyone's choice of a friend, but I have friends for whom I am grateful. I am alive, and I am grateful. Love, Bev. From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzMon Oct 30 11:11:26 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 20:53:37 +1200 From: Robert Johnston To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Miss Manners speaks Dear Linda, Wow! I hadn't read your letter when I wrote to Bud et al today. I think you came close to expressing what I think is "the balance" on this matter. A couple of sentences bothered me a bit. You wrote: having >worked with patients in mental hospitals, I am quite the proponent of >medication. Behavior modification techniques might be helpful once a person is >stabilized, but conventional psychotherapy just doesn't work in these cases. Whatever the cause[s], I feel we have a million miles to go before we really come to understand healing. Pharmaceauticals is where we are at now though, apparently. God help us all! Best wishes, Robert From rstockman@usbnc.orgMon Oct 30 11:12:11 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 95 08:42:53 From: "Stockman, Robert" To: talisman@indiana.edu, Ahang Rabbani Subject: Re: longevity on NSA The archives has compiled a list of everyone who has served on the NSA and their years of service. This is an essential starting point. The list now has about 50 names on it. Since the NSA has existed about 70 years now, that implies a turnover rate of about one every other year. Lately (since 1980) it has run more like once every three years. Seven of the current NSA members have been elected since about 1979 or 1980 (the exceptions were elected, I think, in 1963 and 1968). I don't have time to type up the list on the computer, but if I can find it I will mail it to Ahang or someone else who is willing to type it onto Talisman. The list is not confidential information. More difficult to determine is why someone ceased to serve. I looked over the list once and noted that everyone who has served since about 1960 ceased to serve on the Assembly because they died, got sick, pioneered, were elected to the House, resigned for personal reasons, or were appointed to the Counselors or Auxiliary Board. Appointing NSA members to the Auxiliary Board seems to be a very "popular" mechanism of membership turnover. No one, as near as I could see, has not been reelected *who was eligible* since about 1960. The problem with data before 1960 is that I don't know who the people are or what their personal situations were. So I don't know why they didn't serve. Determing this would require a lot of digging in the archival records. -- Rob Stockman ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: longevity on NSA Author: "Ahang Rabbani" at INTERNET Date: 10/27/95 8:13 PM [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII] Dear Bill, Many thanks for your note. You wrote in part: > We could calculate the distribution of service times on the NSA > using a Kaplan Meier estimator. The difficulty is in what > should be considered as censoring. Obviously current members > would be censored at the time of length of their service. But, > what about those who die as members, are appointed to the > institution of the learned, or elected to the House of Justice. > And there are some members who had to resign because they left > the country, took a sabbatical or others who went pioneering. > ... the most difficult part of the calculation would be > collecting the data (which is always the case). We could start > in 1925, with what Shoghi Effendi indicated as the first NSA. I > assume we could get the names from the Baha'i News, American > Baha'is etc. The harder data is the censoring information based > upon whatever criteria was decided upon. I fully agree with everything you stated, and very much like you suggestion of KM estimator. If as you say, we had a rich database which showed the date of service and reason for termination of service then we would be in business. But short of that, I think someone (David Langness or Rob Stockman?) has already assembled a database of NSA's membership since its formation in 1925. We can just formulate the distribution of length of service on NSA. This should give us some basic information such as the mean-time of service, variability of length of service, outliers, etc. With these results in hand, one can then add a number of other fields to the database to define conditional distributions. Your example of right-censoring due to departure from NSA is excellent. Other factors such as, age at the time of election, race, gender, socioeconomic classification, etc., allow us to develop better models for predictions -- ie. developing a multivariate regression model. For example, then, one can see what is the expected length of service on NSA by, say, a white, middle class guy in his mid 30's. Or determine if there is difference in length of service between men or women, or among the races. This could be very interesting indeed! Which brings us to the question of DATA. Does anyone have any list or data to get us rolling? Surely someone must have put together a list of past NSA members with their years of service. So, brother, can you spare a data? take care, ahang. ps. Back in 1988, I put together a very interesting set of data on service of women on Baha'i institutions. For example, I had a table showing the number of female NSA members for *each* NSA for 1953-88, in 5 year intervals. I plotted the number of female Counsellors since 1968 when the office was created. And the number of female ABMs since 1954, etc. This last two items were divited by continents. It basically covered all the major institutions. Anyway, it clearly showed that the number of women serving on these institutions is really not increasing in any significant way and we are far from having equal representations. For example, the number of NSAs with *no* female members was stricking. But then there were 3 NSAs in 1988 with 7 female members -- poor fellows who served on these NSAs probably never got a word in! Anyway, if there is interest in this sort of thing, I can dig up my files and post some of these statistics. (I really should write a paper on it ... only if I wasn't so lazy ...) From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduMon Oct 30 11:13:16 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 12:03:55 EDT From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: sexism virus alive in healthy minds? Date: Fri, 27 Oct 95 20:13:01 -0400 From: "Ahang Rabbani" Dear Talismafriends: I couldn't contain myself without a response! During my training as a facilitator for Institute Healing Racism, I made a personal commitment to heal sexism in the community as well. At the end of this statement is a relevant story from a Muslim Legend of 12th Century. Esteemed Member Rabbani wrote: >For example, the number of NSAs with *no* female members was >stricking. But then there were 3 NSAs in 1988 with 7 female >members -- > poor fellows who served on these NSAs probably never >got a word in! deeply saddening comment from an esteemed member > (I really should >write a paper on it ... only if I wasn't so lazy ...) And how would that paper look like indeed! THE PEACE DOVE CARRYING THE OLIVE BRANCH One day in a village near Konya, the men gathered at a cafe discussing an important issue while the women were working in the fields carrying their babies on their backs and wearing heavy clothes as to not to cause any lustful feelings in other men. The issue the men could not figure out was determining the sex of the peace dove that carried the olive branch across the Mediterranean to another nation. After a heated debate they decided to seek the advice of the Mullah Nasreddin (a muslim legend lived in 12th Century) known for his jokes. The mullah's response to them "Goodness! This is the easiest one. How come you guys could not figure this one out? Of course it was a male dove! Do you think that a female dove could keep her mouth shut for that long?" Now, this happened in the 12th Century. We are nearly entering the 21st Century and one of the esteemed members of our community is making a similar statement. Is there any progress in the world? How many men of seemingly healthy minds are secretly carrying such a virus and depriving our communities from the participation of women in human affairs? I am truly saddened and at the same time glad to see the symptoms of this virus out in the open as well. I know of many men who suffer from non-stop verbal syndrome while some women are incredibly quite and reflective. Please think! lovingly, quanta *_* From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Oct 30 11:19:41 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 95 12:54:01 -0400 From: Ahang Rabbani To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: apologies [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII] Deepest apologies to all for a very insensitive comment invariably made during a recent posting on statistical data re number of women on Baha'i institutions. I deeply regret having said this inappropriate comment and hope no one was offended as none was intended. It was my inept way of lightening up an otherwise extremely boring posting -- but clearly I failed. I'll promise to be a lot more careful with my remarks in the future. Having apologies for my inexcusable comment, I find it ironic that those who claim to champion the cause of women in the Baha'i community focused on this one passing remark yet said nothing at all about the amazing data that I have assembled and offered to share! They said not one word about wanting to see any real data on how many women have served on Baha'i institutions since the time of the Guardian. This I find really amazing! I make no claims to be a great feminist promoter within the community, but to my knowledge, am the only person in the whole of Baha'i world who has gone through a great deal of trouble researching the exact status of women on all major Baha'i institutions to draw attention to the fact that a greater involvement by women on these institutions should not escape our consideration. I can't begin to tell you the pain I suffered over collection of this data (starting in mid 1980's) and what a great victory a number of us felt when a very brief summary of it was published by the World Centre in a Baha'i International News Service issue which you all have seen quoted in the "Service of Women" paper. It really is ironic that those self-proclaimed feminist supporters on Talisman failed to see the importance of what was being offered and yet took me to task over a poor joke. Its interesting what people focus on. With apologies again, ahang. From belove@sover.netMon Oct 30 11:20:28 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 95 13:54:30 PDT From: belove@sover.net To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: RE: criticism Thanks to Steven Phelps, for bringing forward the message from the "silent" talismanian who said that so much of what was said were like "daggers to the soul." I remember my late mother-in-law who was a sword tounged woman if there ever was one, but very funny. If you criticized her she used to say "another knife in my heart!" So I suppose this is like a dagger to the soul. We've been around this one so much that I keep a file of posting called "secrecy and repression." How much should we be allowed to say in criticism. I don't believe there is a right answer. Rather, I'm sure its a matter of personal style. A pychologist named D. Gottman, Ph.D., has written a book called, boldly, "Why Marriages Succeed or Fail." Gottman runs a lab at the University of Washington and has observed married couples in a most disciplined manner for about 30 years. He has a rating system and claims that anyone, using his rating system, can observe a couple as they discuss a difficult issue and determine whether that couple will be married in five years. He claims an astounding 90% accuracy. I've said all this to give a little weight to his position on whether or not it's healthy to air conflictual issues, or to suppress them in the name of unity. In the case of marriages, he says, it really doesn't matter. In hiis nosology there are three kinds of valid happy satisfying marriages. In "volatile" marriages, the parties air their feelings and have strong passionate arguments.They call each other names and argue irrationally. They also have strong passionate loving and playing. In "negotiator/validator" marriages, the parties sound like textbook cases from a human communications institute. They use "I-messages" and active listening and argue like that couple on E-Street Blues, the police chief and the prosecutor. In "conflict avoidant" marriages, the parties simply don't argue and there is much they don't discuss. And they have stable, long-term, happy marriages. Interestingly enough, according to Gottman, many of these couples are also deeply involved with their churches. So go figure! What do we make of this as far as the discussion of how contentious we might be toward our institutions? 1. That it takes all kinds. It's a diversity issue. 2. That the deeply religious tend to like to avoid conflict. 3. But not all the deeply religious like to avoid conflict. I would hunch that if we divided our group into the mystical types and the ethical types, the mystical types would have more of a taste for the passionate encounter and the ethical types for the orderly encounter. That would leave the validator types as representing the transcendent synthesis -- high passion, but avoiding conflict. And that would lead us to the conclusion that Gottman eschews, that one of the types is superior to the others. Ecch. Too much recursion. Regards, Philip ------------------------------------- Name: Philip Belove E-mail: belove@sover.net Date: 10/28/95 Time: 13:54:30 This message was sent by Chameleon ------------------------------------- Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A. Einstein From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduMon Oct 30 11:20:52 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 95 15:03:18 EWT From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Ahang's posting Dear Ahang, thanks for posting in your own defence. You have saved me the time and effort of doing so. Indeed, I wish we could discuss the statistics you have unearthed and focus on them. One of the problems I have with "new feminist" perspectives is the over sensitivity to minutia and the focus on so much that is not of consequence to the major issues facing women. My feeling is that it makes no difference to me whatsoever if people think I talk too much or criticize me for my love of fashionable clothes or whatever. As long as I can have a say in those things that are dear to me and not be excluded from realms of "power" (I've said that bad word again, guys, I know it), then say what you want about me. Thanks, Ahang, both for the valuable statistics and for your forthright respone. Linda From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduMon Oct 30 11:21:12 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 16:16:17 EDT From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: apologies Mewlana Rumi stated: "ya oldugun gibi gorun, ya da gorundugun gibi ol: (turkish) "Either, appear as you are; or, be as you appear" Abdu'l'Baha stated: "Be kind sincerely, not in appearance only" Dear Ahang, I accept your sincere apology on my own behalf only. I already have the statistical information which you so generously offered recently. Many thanks. lovingly, quanta (*_*) From mcfarlane@upanet.uleth.caMon Oct 30 11:21:56 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 16:22:39 -0600 From: Gordon McFarlane To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Strange bedfellows. I believe the following story encapsulates the quintessence of the ongoing discussion re. criticism of one another and of the institutions of the Faith. STRANGE BEDFELLOWS . . A Muslem Cleric, a Hindu, and a Social Critic were travelling together. One night they came to an Inn that only had two beds available. There was a barn nearby, and the Hindu, being a humble and self- effacing sort of person insisted that he sleep in the barn. However, shortly after the Moslem and the Critic settled down for the night there was a knock at the door. It was the Hindu, who with some embarrassement and copius apologies explained that because there was a cow in the barn, and he believed cows to be sacred, he could not sleep there. The Moslem smiled, explained that he understood the poor man's dilema and said he would be content to sleep in the barn. But soon the the Moslem returned to the Inn. He too, with emabarrased apologies, explained that because there was a pig in the barn, and because pigs were considered unclean in his faith, he could not sleep their either. So the Critic, which much humming and hawing and grumbling about the "ludicrous beliefs" of others, grudgingly consented to sleep in the barn. Sure enough, within half an hour there was another knock on the Inn door - - It was the cow and the pig. "Let those who percieve take warning!" uncritically yours, Gord. --- Gordon McFarlane e-mail: MCFARLANE@upanet.uleth.ca Public Access Internet The University of Lethbridge From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Oct 30 11:22:29 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 95 16:39:01 -0400 From: Ahang Rabbani To: "LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.e" <"lwalbrid@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu"@esds01.mrgate.bmoa.umc.dupont.com>, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: women (was Ahang's posting) [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII] Dear Linda, Very much appreciate your kind thoughts; means a lot to me. I'll dig up the numbers and in a few days start posting them. I think most people be interested in them. One of the table that I had was a comparison between the percent of women on NSA vs. percent of women on national legislator of each country. I don't recall a single country in the world where the Baha'i percent was worse than the country percent. In other words, universally the Baha'i community practices promotion of women better than secular society -- and in many instances noticeably better. There were other interesting trends. For example, in 1953, 40% of NSA members were women, but in 1988 only 24% (I could be off by a percentage or two since quoting from memory). But the point is that there is a consistent, marked drop in the percent of women serving on NSAs over time. This incidentally should not be viewed as a "negative" thing, because we simply have a lot of "new" NSAs which were formed in recent years, or NSAs in countries that its just not practical to have too many women on NSAs (such as Arab countries, North Africa, etc.). However, I think its also true that we have fewer powerful Baha'i women in the community in comparison to the time of Abdu'l-Baha or the beloved Guardian. And the other thing that I noticed was that actually the number of American and Persian believers on NSAs was increasing. Again in 1988, a total of 24% of all NSA members were Persian pioneers. (Off hand don't recall what percent were American, but it wasn't far from the same figure, ie. 24%.) This partly explains why since 1988 the number of Persian members of the House has increased from 2 to 4 -- but I think there are other much more important factors operating. Anyway, what was striking was that despite our of best efforts to promote indigenous believers, and the House's repeated call for local believers to begin assuming their rightful place in administration, still American/Persian pioneers accounted for nearly a half of all NSA members. Interesting, don't you think? One last thought: I liked it much better when Burl's name was in the heading. Could we all agree that no matter who's the subject, we use his name? ;-} much love, ahang. From MBOYER%UKANVM.BITNET@pucc.PRINCETON.EDUMon Oct 30 11:22:41 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 95 17:23:57 CDT From: Milissa To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Ahang and the Dove Hi Dawn-- I can understand why you are upset at Ahang's joke, but really he was just teasing! The difference is that Ahang was teasing but the Mulla was not! And besides, don't we tell jokes about men, too? and aren't they fuunier? *grin* Love, Milissa mboyer@ukanvm.cc.ukans.edu From mfoster@tyrell.netMon Oct 30 11:23:40 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 22:26:02 -0500 (EDT) From: "Mark A. Foster" To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Fundamentalism To: talisman@indiana.edu Talismanians - Since the subject of fundamentalism has arisen again (thankfully, in an analytical, rather than accusatory, sense), I thought that I might as well offer my own view of the subject . Words, of course, are not fixed and only mean we, collectively (and sometimes individually), choose them to mean. Therefore, it is not surprising that, in the current "culture wars" climate, there are numerous definitions of fundamentalism, pointing to everything from anti-intellectualism, to separatism, to literalism, to traditionalism, and even (especially among those who would proudly apply the designation to themselves) to a strong, often anti-"secular humanist" or anti-Western, faith commitment. From a critical standpoint, I think it would be fair to say that fundamentalism represents a reactionary response to modernity. The independent investigation of reality will inevitably challenge one's preconceptions - forcing one to come to terms with a realization that most things are not so cut and dry. In the recent letter written to me on behalf of the Universal House of Justice, the Department of the Secretariat wrote: The prosecution of this vast enterprise [the creation of a global civilization] will depend on a progressive interaction between the truths and principles of religion and the discoveries and insights of scientific inquiry. This entails living with ambiguities as a natural and inescapable feature of the process of exploring reality. However, on an intentional (phenomenological) level perhaps, I think that it would be justifiable to say that fundamentalism is a form of spiritual materialism. When words are taken literally, materiality begins to lose its analogical function. So, circumcision becomes mere religious practice and is often not understood as a ritualized symbol of the "heartistic" (with credit to Rev. Sun Myung Moon for this neologism ) linking of the human heart to the Covenant of God; Muhammad's words about the Crucifixion and Sonship of Christ are seen as contradictions to the Gospel accounts rather than as affirmations of their inner meaning; or the Edenic account is seen as contrary to modern science rather than as a parable of the journey of the soul (Eve) through the various degrees attachment to the human world (the Serpent). Loving greetings, Mark * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion * ___ * UniQWK #2141* Structuralists Know the Lingo ;-) From tan1@cornell.eduMon Oct 30 11:24:07 1995 Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 23:59:34 -0400 (EDT) From: "Timothy A. Nolan" To: jrcole@umich.edu, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Baha'i Courts In message Thu, 19 Oct 1995 00:30:11 -0400 (EDT), Juan R Cole writes: jc> I would personally be quite happy to have the jc> NSA appoint the judge or judges, *if* the appointment was for jc>life and so the judge would not be liable to retaliation for a decision jc> that was not popular with the NSA. Juan, I understand the desire for a judiciary that is free from improper pressure. However, appointment for *life* bothers me. The hard fact is that, for most of us, as we get older, our powers decline.....physical powers, and, to a degree, mental powers. I really do not mean any unkindness, but it may be that certain individuals, when they reach, say, 80 years of age, are no longer able to serve as a judge. This is NOT to say, of course, that old people are worthless; that is certainly not true. But as one gets into advanced age, it may be impossible for a person to perform the duties required of a judge. No doubt there would be exceptions, but I think the rule holds for most. If a judge is appopinted for life, what should be done about a judge who clearly can no longer do the job? Also, what about judges who are simply incompetent or lackadaisical about their duties. Such a person, if appointed for life, could do a lot of harm. I agree a judge needs to be protected from pressure that should not exist in the first place, but there has to be a better way than life appointment. Perhaps judges could have a mandatory retirement age, say 75, and maybe judges should be required to be evaluated by their fellow judges say, every 5 years. Tim Nolan From tan1@cornell.eduMon Oct 30 11:24:32 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 00:19:47 -0400 (EDT) From: "Timothy A. Nolan" To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: RE: seconding Juan In message Thu, 26 Oct 95 14:49:57 EWT, LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu writes: l> I am also in complete agreement with Tony (although this has not always l> been the case and must come as a shock to him) that placing "cause" before l> "community" leads to callousness and disregard for human beings. Images l> of Stalinism and Naxism immediately come to mind. Anything for the l> cause. On the everyday level, I have seen parents sacrificing their l> children for "the cause." The kids take a back seat to Baha'i meetings l> and committee work. I agree this happens, and it is tragic. However I do not agree that putting the Cause first inevitably leads to this. The behavior you remark on, is, in my view, the result of a very shallow, heart-less understanding of what the Cause is. If a person studies with care the sacred Writings, and the example of Abdu'l Baha, then there is no justification at all for neglecting children, or ignoring the human needs of other Baha'is or other people. It is true that there are individuals who use the Cause as an excuse for pretrending human needs, emotional and psychological needs are not important. But that is simply an incorrect understanding of what the Cause is, in my opinion. The writings, and the life of Abdu'l Baha overflow with lessons about truly caring for others, especially one's own children! The fact that some individuals mis-use the Cause to evade responsiblity for truly caring about other people....this is not the fault of the Cause, but of those people. If I actually put the Cause first, then I would be *more* compassionate, *more* patient, *more* friendly. And, truly putting the Cause first does not lead to neglect of children. Committee meetings and typing reports are not the essence of this Cause. Love is. Tim Nolan tan1@cornell.edu From tan1@cornell.eduMon Oct 30 11:25:02 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 00:35:32 -0400 (EDT) From: "Timothy A. Nolan" To: Member1700@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Reforms in Baha'i Administration In message Fri, 27 Oct 1995 23:33:51 -0400, Member1700@aol.com writes: tl> But, the strongest evidence for the fact of assured incumbency is tl> that no NSA member has ever been unseated at a regular election. I agree this has not happened since the 1960's. Charlotte Linfoot is sort of an exception, as she was not re-elected one year. But at the time she had suffered a severe stroke, and could not function as she usually did. She died not long after that election I think. So, that instance is not an example of an *able* person not being re-elected. Several decades ago, I think Louis Gregory was not re-elected to the NSA one year. Could someone confirm or refute this? > Anyway, I am more and more disturbed by the insistance of some > Talismanians that no individual has any right to object to the decisions > of a Baha'i institution on the grounds that they are unjust I have not seen, on Talisman, any post that said this. What has appeared on Talisman, from time to time, is the idea that criticism should be done in such a way that it shows respect for the institution, that it does not undermine the authority and prestige which are the right of the institutions, that criticism not consist of imputation of base motives to members of these institutions, that criticism should not express the idea that "if only those NSA members understood the Faith as well as I do, everything would be alright." The Guardian clearly stated that individual Baha'is have the right to criticise Assembly decisions, *provided the criticism is done in the right way, with a respectful tone*. Tim Nolan tan1@cornell.edu From cbuck@ccs.carleton.caMon Oct 30 11:25:26 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 1:11:54 EDT From: Christopher Buck To: Talisman@indiana.edu Cc: Christopher Buck Subject: Is Science on a Par with Religion? Mark Foster quotes a very interesting excerpt from a letter addressed to him by the Universal House of Justice: ______________ The prosecution of this vast enterprise [the creation of a global civilization] will depend on a progressive interaction between the truths and principles of religion and the discoveries and insights of scientific inquiry. This entails living with ambiguities as a natural and inescapable feature of the process of exploring reality. ______________ RESPONSE: My question is this: Is science really on a par with religion? Can science ever constrain statements in Baha'i texts regarding the physical universe? If, as was suggested in a previous post (by Juan?), that Baha'u'llah's statement to the effect that, *Every fixed star hath its planets, and every planet its own creatures,* was probably based on a nineteenth-century European astronomy text translated into Arabic and known to have been in the Holy Family, then can science constrain our understanding of this piece of revelation? I have heard some Persian Baha'is say that the *science* referred to in the Baha'i principle of the harmony of science and religion is not really Western science as we know it. Any comments? --Christopher Buck ********************************************************************** * * * ********************************************************************** From dpeden@imul.comMon Oct 30 11:25:53 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 08:21:53+030 From: Don Peden To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Women in the Faith Dear Talispersons: I find Ahangs data interesting in showing a decline in powerful women in the Faith. Excuse my ignorance (sincerely), but what constitutes a "powerful woman"? It is an interesting definition. Is there a difference between "powerful", "opinionated", "forceful", "stubborn", "steadfast", etc.? I guess I hear these terms used, but, frankly, don't have a clue as to what they mean in the author's mind. It is all so subjective. Are women less powerful today because there are more women in power and they are therefore no longer a novelty? Are women being dropped or abdicating from decision making roles due to other interests? Are the data themselves reflecting a true drop in numerical balances, or are they reflecting a growth of numbers in which the ratios of the statistics change? It begs a lot of questions, doesn't it? Does anyone have some other data to shed light? Or, (dangerous question number one coming up) and knowledge of why these statistics are reflecting what they are reflecting? What is the "new feminist" movement? I haven't even really been able to follow what is going on in the old. Here in Africa, the empowerment of women, as I have stated before, has quite a different time frame and directions than what it does in North America or Europe, at least on the surface. Bev. From dpeden@imul.comMon Oct 30 11:26:06 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 08:37:58+030 From: Don Peden To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Sacrificing Children Dear Timothy: Just to clarify a point, when my husband and I decided to pioneer, it was in consultation with our children, with an Assembly, with the National Assembly, and with a lot of prayer. Doors opened, we went through. I am rather upset at the thought that may exist in some minds that folks who pioneer are "neglecting the needs of their children". Although this happens, it is not always the case. We took every step possible to safeguard the well-being of our children and ensure that their needs were being met, and that they were in what we thought of as a loving environment. It didn't work, and the lesson we learned was never to entrust our children to others, no matter how proper it seems. This is not a blanket statement. There are circumstances where it works beautifully. Our situation did not. I accept responsibility for making an error in judgement...not for neglecting my children in the name of the Faith. Bev. From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzMon Oct 30 11:26:20 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 18:55:51 +1200 From: Robert Johnston To: Christopher Buck , talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Is Science on a Par with Religion? With reference to a Mark Foster-mediated House quotation, Chris Buck asks, "Is science really on a par with religion?" I don't think the quotation suggests that such a parity exists. Further, as the Writings delimit scientific projects, religion clearly assumes priority over science. Regarding Chris' questions concerning the nature of science, Talismanians have argued this matter at length already and have not reached agreement. Has anyone got some persuasive new insights? Robert. From dan_orey@qmbridge.ccs.csus.eduMon Oct 30 11:26:37 1995 Date: 29 Oct 95 00:22:07 U From: Dan Orey To: cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Is Science on a Par with Reply to: RE>Is Science on a Par with Re Thanx Christopher - I am also interested in this thread. I've been wondering for a while what happens when a Baha'i teaching is found to be unscientific. I am very uncomfortable with the arguement "its bad science" if it does fall into accord with Baha'i writings, etc. I'd be interested in what others think about this as well. regards, Daniel From jwinters@epas.utoronto.caMon Oct 30 11:28:39 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 03:55:23 -0500 (EST) From: Jonah Winters To: Christopher Buck Cc: talisman Subject: Good news for Baha'i Scholarship Dear Chris and all Talismanians: Chris, have you been praying right, or what? Last night the ABS of the University of Toronto hosted an event at which many of the deans were invited to a formal get-together at the Baha'i Centre for a lecture and social, to meet the UofT ABS, and to be presented with the Prosperity Statement. The main faculty representative couldn't come, and asked Prof. Oxtoby (Chris's adviser, for those who don't know him) to take his place. When Oxtoby came to the mike to express the usual niceties on behalf of the invited deans, he took the time to say how much he had always appreciated the Baha'i community and how impressed he had always been with the Baha'i students he had had. They had always stood out, he said, and gave the concrete examples that they seemed to have a better grasp of current world events, a better knowledge of world geography, and had traveled to more places than any other subset of his students had. And then he said he had a personal note to add. He pulled a book out of his satchel, saying "I only just received this yesterday, and would like to bring it to your attention." It was, of course, Chris's new _Symbol and Secret_. He then spent a good two or three minutes enthusiastically praising Chris's book in the most positive terms, saying that it was not only a valuable contribution to Baha'i scholarship and one that would be of immediate interest to all of the Baha'is in the room, but also was the fruit of the work of one Baha'i scholar whom he was very glad to have the opportunity to work with and who was a commendation to our community! This in front of at least 50 Baha'i students and UofT deans. He concluded by saying that he recommend that anyone interested see him during the evening and he would show them the book, but he warned that he was going to be especially careful that, when he left the Centre that evening, he would be gripping the book firmly in both hands (i.e., that no-one could even think of borrowing it)! Congratulations, Chris; I can't imagine a better pitch, all the more so since it was totally irrelevant to the subject of the evening, was obviously spontaneous and, equally obvious, was sincere! I know that he made a significant impression, for people sought out him and his copy of the book all evening, and commented to each other about what a surprisingly positive view of Baha'is he had. Oh, Oxtoby also said that you sent him the book shrinkwrapped with a note saying that you preferred to send him a virgin copy than to open its packaging and sign it. He said that he really wished you had opened it, that it just wasn't complete without your signature. To our fellow Talismanians, I want to point out that this event, though isolated and small, is actually quite important. Only two days prior to this, I had (at Chris's request) gone into the Centre's bookstore and asked the manager if anyone had ordered _Symbol and Secret_ yet. The manager said, no, what is it? I replied that it was volume seven of the SBBR series, which he said he wasn't even familiar with. It is not just that this manager is poorly read in Baha'i secondary literature, for I know that he is well read. Minutes after speaking with him I was speaking with another Baha'i there who said "Kalimat? Is that a person?" Though I hid it, I was shocked. But now I know not to be discouraged, for now 50 of the Toronto ABS's most active students and some non-Baha'i scholars have heard a wonderful endorsement by a world-famous scholar of Baha'i scholarship and of Baha'is as a whole. Thanks, Chris. -Jonah =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Jonah and Kari Winters From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Oct 30 11:29:16 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 08:02:01 -0500 From: Ahang Rabbani To: "Don_R._Calkins@commonlink.com" <"don_r._calkins@commonlink.com"@esds01.mrgate.bmoa.umc.dupont.com>, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: RE: Invocation [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII] Dear Don, "Mustaghath" is a term used in the Persian Bayan by the Bab referring to the time that separate His appearance from that of Him Whom God will make Manifest. Its numerical value is 2001. In Wahid III, Bab 15, of Persian Bayan, the Bab states: "None knoweth save God as to when the Manifestation [of Him Whom God will make Manifest] shall be. But it is hoped of God's goodness that it will arrive before the [number of] "mustaghath". And the Proof is naught but the signs (verses) of His Being in itself, for all else than Him is know by Him, while He can be known by naught else." Azalis took this statement literally and said since 2001 years had not elapsed, therefore Baha'u'llah cannot be fulfillment of this Bayanic expectation. Baha'u'llah has revealed a commentary (fairly complex in language) where he unravels the mystery of "mustaghath" and shows that numerically actually year 9 and 19 were intended. Therefore the invocation Ya Illahu'l-Mustaghath is really the same as invoking the name of Baha'u'llah -- which indeed is extremely powerful and as you say not to be used casually. Incidentally, you asked if "mustaghath" refers to appearance of the next Manifestation, and since I don't know of any such reference, seriously think that it finds its fulfillment in Baha'u'llah and none other. lovingly, ahang. From mfoster@tyrell.netMon Oct 30 11:29:34 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 09:25:49 -0600 (CST) From: "Mark A. Foster" To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Science & Religion To: talisman@indiana.edu Chris Buck wrote in response to my quote from the letter written to me on behalf of the Universal House of Justice: C > My question is this: Is science really on a par with religion? C >Can science ever constrain statements in Baha'i texts regarding the C >physical universe? ... C > I have heard some Persian Baha'is say that the *science* C >referred to in the Baha'i principle of the harmony of science and C >religion is not really Western science as we know it. Any comments? Chris, You raise a subject which, as you know, has been discussed a great deal here on Talisman. However, it appears to me that any *answer*, if it can be called that, would need to be given as a gestalt, a matrix or configuration, which would acknowledge its multiple permutations, rather than as nominal measurement. Simply stating that religion does "this" and science does "that" will not, IMO, resolve the dilemna. As I have mentioned here before, `Abdu'l-Baha seems to have used the term "science" (in translation, of course) in at least two senses: 1. The science of reality: the "words He hath revealed," divine science, spiritual science, the progressive teachings of the Prophets, or "the science of the love of God" 2. Material science: "bridges to reality" or sometimes just as "science" Likewise, IMV, the harmony of science and religion can also be viewed from more than one angle: 1. The fact that, from a God's-eye viewpoint, _true_ material science and _true_ religion are not in conflict with one another. Of course, we a long way from developing true material science and from comprehending the revealed verities which constitute true religion. However, ambiguities will, from my POV, always exist since our own human vision of reality is inevitably partial while the knowledge of the Manifestation is universal. "Seeing" the worlds of God which Baha'u'llah reveals can enable us to begin to view spiritual matters from an overall perspective. 2. The application of the scientific method, defined by the Master as the investigation of reality, to religion (the divine verities of the science of reality/the progressive Prophetic teachings). In both the science of reality (spiritual science) and in the bridges to reality (material science), the Baha'i is counseled to be free of superstition and to be practice justice (the essence of science, i.e., to see things with one's own eyes and not through the eyes of others). Since we cannot be certain about the meaning of verses such as "... every planet its own creatures ...", intellectual and spiritual humility is essential. The task of reconciling the science of reality with material scientific investigation should, IMHO, incorporate the realization that: 1. Sacred Texts point us to a higher spiritual reality, and many statements, such as those seemingly speaking to creatures on every planet, may be either parablical, or literal, or both. The primary purpose of sacred Text is not to reveal material scientific knowledge but to inform us on the reality which underlies outward appearances. However, possible material meanings cannot be entirely discounted - even if they contradict current scientific views. Material science, of course, is not fixed but continually evolving. Ambiguity is an inevitable result of the relative state of human knowledge. 2. The acceptance of the Revelation as foundational to scientific and other scholarly investigations is foremost at the spiritual, or metaphysical, level - what I referred to in my paper on "Moral Development: A Narrative Approach," presented at the ABS meeting, as the Baha'i metaphysic of unity in diversity - beginning with the Unity of God and the diversity of His Manifestations and emanations. With loving regards, Mark * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ___ * UniQWK #2141* Structuralists Know the Lingo ;-) From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpMon Oct 30 11:30:11 1995 Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 0:32:31 JST From: "Stephen R. Friberg" To: Christopher Buck Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu, Christopher Buck Subject: Re: Is Science on a Par with Religion? Dear Chris: You quote the Universal House of Justice and ask > My question is this: Is science really on a par with religion? > Can science ever constrain statements in Baha'i texts regarding the > physical universe? In my opinion, you have asked a very important question, and I sincerely hope that a long and fruitful discussion will ensue. I lack firm answers, but in interest of helping along the discussion I would like to express some opinions. Is science really on par with religion? As the questions is stated, it is very general, and has slightly different nuances than the expected question: "Are science and religion one?" If you ask whether or not science can effect a clear positive transformation in the hearts and minds of the people of our beloved planet, to my mind the answer is no. But I think that religion has time and again demonstrated its power to transform and energize whole societies. One reason that science can not change a whole society is because it is a highly-specialized pursuit that requires an intense dedication and much time to master, and therefore can be pursued only by a small percentage of the people in any given society. But religion, because of its themes and tremendous breadth, can and has interested nearly everybody in societies. So, as a vehicle inculcating ideas and concepts and allowing the exchange of ideas, its impact is much, much larger. This may explain why, with the notable exception of Buddhism, religions have tended not to be "difficult" in the scholastic sense. But in another sense, science, interpreted widely, has always been in an interplay with religion. I simply can not imagine secular societies embracing beliefs in the oneness of the physical laws of the universe without a preceding belief in the efficacy of gods, or a God, enforcing such a oneness. But then, I can not imagine the increasing sophistication of religion without the development of more sophisticated understandings of the nature of the universe in science and philosophy. The two seem to go hand-in-hand Does science have the writ to override and correct statements in the Divine Writings? Those who have answered yes have often been skewered in particular instances by later scientific developments. As an example, consider Abdu'l Baha's use of the concept of the "ether". As a scientific concept, it was toppled by Einsteinian relativity and experiment. Does this mean that Abdu'l Baha was wrong? Not necessarily. The concept of the ether is coming back in an entirely new form in physics. While it is too soon to say whether or not the new concept will catch on, it is safe to say that the underlying reasons why the old concept was introduced in the first place are still there and still pose questions. > If, as was suggested in a previous post (by Juan?), that > Baha'u'llah's statement to the effect that, *Every fixed star hath > its planets, and every planet its own creatures,* was probably based > on a nineteenth-century European astronomy text translated into Arabic > and known to have been in the Holy Family, then can science constrain > our understanding of this piece of revelation? If you insist that this statement be taken literally, i.e., every single star has planets, and every single planet has creatures, it is nonsense. I have serious doubts that any respectable European astronomy text would make such a statement even in the 19th century. It has long been surmised that Mercury, Venus and the other non-Earth planets (with the exception of Mars) are totally inhospitable to life. This contradicts the 2nd half of the statement. On the other hand, if you accept it to mean that there are many, many stars with planets, and many planets with life, then you are well in accord with what is currently believed to be true. Astronomy has been focusing much attention lately on trying to observe planets of the stars, and there is increasing success. However, there are technical reasons to believe that we may not be able to ascertain whether or not there is life on those planets. > I have heard some Persian Baha'is say that the *science* > referred to in the Baha'i principle of the harmony of science and > religion is not really Western science as we know it. Any comments? I recently did a word search on "science" in the Writings, and I found many instances where the meaning seemed more general than our current technically oriented definition. So, I think this is an open question, and I strongly hope that some of our translators and historians would assist by explaining the various different connotations of the Arabic and Persian words translated into English as "science". Yours respectfully, Stephen R. Friberg Physics, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone (NTT) Basic Research Laboratories, Atsugi, Japan From lua@sover.netMon Oct 30 11:30:17 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 10:43:05 -0500 From: LuAnne Hightower To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: women Dear Ahang, Thank you for your kind offer to post the statistics on women and your kind apology. I eagerly await further postings. I am curious about the ratio of women to men enrolled in the Faith in 1953 and 1988 and wonder if this might shed some light on the numbers you posted for those years? In love and gratitude, LuAnne From cfarhoum@osf1.gmu.eduMon Oct 30 11:30:52 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 10:42:06 -0500 (EST) From: Cheshmak A Farhoumand To: Jonah Winters Cc: Christopher Buck , talisman Subject: Re: Good news for Baha'i Scholarship Dear Jonah, Allah-u-Abha. So good to hear the success of the event at U of T. I am a U of T alumni and served on the ABS there for 5 years as Chair and Secretary. I was also the Assistant to Auxiliary Board for Propagation there. It is so wonderful to hear that the progress of the Faith continues there. What are you studying there by the way, i don't think i have ever met you or your wife. Prof. Oxtoby was my Prof for world religions class. Very nice man. i remember his syllabus did not have a section on the Faith. Wendy Fowlds and i made an app't with him and went in and asked if he would allow us to make a short presentation. He said no he did not like students to do that, but he himself would do a short presentation. i was really excited on that day, and he did make a presentation, but it was short and not completely accurate. But many students got to hear the name of the Faith and did come and ask questions about it. In fact several students from the class came to firesides after that. I am so happy to hear that he said all those wonderful things about the Faith, and i am sure Chris had a very positive and good impression on him. Prof. Oxtoby will probably make a very different presentation in his class about the Faith from now on. Would you please send me a message at my e-mail and tell me who else was there and what else happened. Was Prof Byer there? He was the faculty member that was instrumental in getting the Baha'i course through. I would love to hear more about the event as i know many of the Profs there etc. Hope to hear from you soon and send my love and congratulations to all the friends at ABS. Special hello to Paria. In peace, Cheshmak Master's Student Conflict Analysis and Resolution From s0a7254@tam2000.tamu.eduMon Oct 30 11:36:35 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 10:23:14 -0600 (CST) From: Saman Ahmadi To: talisman Subject: reform/elections, tone Dear Friends, 1. Q: Why does it take 100,000,000 sperm to fertilize an egg? A: Because none will stop to ask directions. 2. I think there are two reasons why the are few changes in the NSA membership. a) The delegates feel that the NSA is doing a fine job. b) The delegates feel that they must vote for someone who everybody knows. I personally think it is a combination of the two. The way I understand the Baha'i electoral process, I should vote for someone who has certain characteristics (outlined by the Guardian) - whether that persons is well-known is unimportant [I have mentioned this before and it has been dismissed as naive - I am not offended] 3. We went through a bit of the math that Tony has suggested: the improbability of a new person being elected to the NSA even if all the delegates vote for 8 incumbants and 1 new member - I'll dig up the post and re-submit it. I remain unconvinced. 4. Criticism is fine. What I have a problem with [to which Rob pointed already] is the often beginning paragraph of such posts: they ususally first charaterize the quality of an Institutions decision with negative adjectives and then present suggestions - suggestions which are sometimes good. I am still puzzled by the need of the first step and further puzzled that no one concedes that this first step has a negative affect on the acceptance of the suggestions. I suppose one explanation is that if the NSA is mature enough, it should subtract the good ideas no matter how they are presented - I remain unconvinced. regards, sAmAn From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Oct 30 11:37:59 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 10:41:01 -0500 From: Ahang Rabbani To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Number of Tablets [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII] In response to my query of a couple days ago as to the number of Tablets, one of the friends just shared some detailed information which I believe others might find of interest too. The source for this information is a brochure: "Baha'i Archives - Preserving and Safeguarding the Sacred Texts" distributed at the last International Convention and, I believe, subsequently published in `Andalib (A quarterly journal published in Canada). For Baha'u'llah, 7,160 unique items are known, and His total output is estimated at 15,000. For `Abdu'l-Baha, 15,549 unique items are known, and His total output to have been estimated at 30,800. For Shoghi Effendi, the World Centre holds 16,370 outgoing letters, and estimate the total to have been 30,100. Regarding the number of unique works from Baha'u'llah, the reality is that until the Archives Office of the World Centre (the custodian of the original Texts) completes its inventory, which will take another two or more years, no one really knows how many unique pieces the World Centre holds from His Pen. All the published figures are estimates. The situation is complicated by multiple copies of many items, and by some items which actually contain more than one Tablet. Also, some weeks ago, in a communication from Shahrooz Tedjarati (an ex-Talismanian and current pioneer in the Far East), he noted: "When I was working at the Archives [Office of the World Centre], we had found a few booklets from Mirza Aqa Jan's papers which we called Khadem's logs. He called it "Fehreste Alvahe ErsAli" [List of Tablets sent]. In it, he had written in great detail the bearer, recipients, city and the first line of every Tablet along with dates of revelation/dispatch. My estimate was that around 9600 Tablets were listed there. It was, however, only Tablets revealed after 187? (I believe it was 1876, but not sure). I could not find in any of Khadem's papers any indication that he was doing this before in Adrianople, Constantinople and Baghdad. However, it is a wonderful piece of work and we are ever grateful for Khadem's meticulous diligence. I am sure it will be handy somewhere down the road in this project." incidentally, the project that Shahrooz refers to at the end of his note, is a massive undertaking by the Persian Institute for Baha'i Studies of Canada (at the World Centre's direction/ encouragement) to identify the identity of recipients of all Tablets and assemble as much biographical information as can be gathered about them. In my view, this project is the most important undertaking since the publication of the Kitab-i Aqdas. The Institute has already arrayed a long list of students of the Cause to participate in this historic effort and is now in process of formulating its strategy in more details. I want to offer my deepest congratulations to the World Centre for its foresight in outlining this project to identify historical details about the circumstances of Revelation of Tablets and their recipients. Also am profoundly grateful that the students of the Faith everywhere are given opportunity to participate and contribute to it. Well done. love to all, ahang. From jmenon@bcon.comMon Oct 30 11:38:38 1995 Date: 29 Oct 1995 20:07:50 GMT From: Jonathan Menon To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Ontario Baha'i High School Hi Derek, The Nancy Campbell Collegiate Institute is currently in its second year. I have been invoved with it on the sidelines since the idea to open one began, and I know the Principal very well. Actually, I also designed the pamphlet. If you could send me the address of Bosch, I can arrange for some material to be sent there. Actually, I'm surprised that you haven't already received material since the pamphlets were mailed to Louhelen and Green Acre, so I don't know why Bosch was left out. Also, thanks Kathleen, for letting me know that the flyers reached the ABS conference in San Francisco. The School would be interested to know that. By the way, the quality of the school is excellent. While it is not a "Baha'i" school in the sense that the Institutions don't own it, it has strong contact with the Institution of the Learned in Ontario. Actually, I think there has even been an Assistant appointed to help the school develop. The influence of the Faith is quite evident at the school, and it is named after a great teacher of the Faith in Canada who was also a renowned artist, dancer, etc. When Nancy Campbell passed away in 1980, the House of Justice wrote that she was to be considered a "pillar of the Faith in Canada." Take care, Jonathan Hamilton, Canada From belove@sover.netMon Oct 30 11:38:45 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 16:11:53 PST From: belove@sover.net To: Christopher Buck , talisman@indiana.edu Cc: 748-9178@mcimail.com Subject: RE: Is Science on a Par with Religion? I want to take a shot at the science/religion question. I had a way of answering it for myself, but I don't know whether my answer would address the theological issues. Also, given my answer, I haven't the slightest idea what to do with the "fixed stars have planets which have creatures" revelation found in Gleanings. I've decided to handle it "scientifically" by ignoring it for now. It's a troublesome statement because I don't believe it is scientifically correct. Or at least that it is highly unlikely to be scientifically correcty. So If Baha'ullah's station depends on his scientific infallibility, I'm in a lot of trouble as far as my faith is concerned. So I'll skip over that issue and go to the other one, the relationship between religion and science. I decided that these are two different universes of discourse and that, while they might fit, as a hand might fit a glove, there is no overlap between them. But so much of the discussion I read on this matter seems to come from the religious side of the table. It seems to not understand what science is. I suspect that this misunderstanding of the nature of science comes about because Science is the Mythology of our day and is therefore not precisely understood. People think they know what science is, much the way people think they know what consciousness is. But actually, if you compare Science and Religion, it is Religion that is self-evident and it is science which requires careful definition. By "Science" these days, it think we mean a method of drawing conclusions. Science is a way of achieving an impossible point of view: total objectivity. Science is a way of figuring out what it is possible to say that is completely independent of subjectivity, inner experience, wishes, wants, dreams, and emotions. Science is a way for you imagining things as though your relationship to those things were not part of the picture. Religion, on the other hand, imagines things (presents them to your imagination, to your ability to form images) as though everything were totally, deeply, essentially personal. You know, closer than the vein in your neck. That's what religious stuff is about. Now, of course, these two ways of imagining, i.e., presenting information to consciousness, have to meet. But how they meet is sort of astounding, I think. For me, it's like they start out in opposite directions and meet around the back of the world. Science attempts to filter out all individuality. It is a method of perception. I goes like this: It claims that any human being in the entire world, or any human being that ever lived or will live -- if they follow this particular proceedure (look through this microscope, measure this stuff, drop that thing from that height, etc.) then they will all experience the same perception. It doesn't matter who you are or what you want to see, this is what will happen. (Of course the Heisenbery convention changed all that, but to do more than mention it at this time would hopelessly complicate my point.) Back to how science and religion meet. Religion, I propose, attempts to encompass the deepest individuality imaginable and in doing so, also arrives an a inter-subjective universality, the anima mundi, the soul of the world. It says that, if we go deep enough within and are true enough to ourselves and the true nature of our Nature, we will each and all arrive at the Beloved. Or something like that. Best I can do on a quiet sunday afternoon. Thanks Chris, for the question. Philip ------------------------------------ Name: Philip Belove E-mail: belove@sover.net Date: 10/29/95 Time: 16:11:53 This message was sent by Chameleon ------------------------------------- Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A. Einstein From tan1@cornell.eduMon Oct 30 11:39:08 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 18:49:37 -0400 (EDT) From: "Timothy A. Nolan" To: dpeden@imul.com, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: RE: Sacrificing Children In message Sun, 29 Oct 95 08:37:58+030, dpeden@imul.com (Don Peden) writes: b> I am rather upset at the thought that may exist in some minds that b> folks who pioneer are "neglecting the needs of their children". I sincerely regret that my post appeared to be a personal criticism of your choices in life. I believe I did not make any reference to your family in my post. I merely expressed the opinion that *some* people use service to the Faith (the Cause) as an excuse to ignore the human needs of children or of other people. This was a general observation, not directed at anyone in particular. Since pioneering is a highly meritorious deed, according to the Writings, it follows that pioneering does not necesarily involve neglect of children. You know you have done the best you could for your children. The opinions of others do not alter this fact. b> I accept responsibility for making an error in b> judgement...not for neglecting my children in the name of the Faith. Since my post made no mention of you or your family, I do not understand why my words seemed to be a criticism of you personally. But, if they did, I apologize. Tim Nolan tan1@cornell.edu From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduMon Oct 30 11:39:43 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 18:34:50 EWT From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Where's Burl? This morning I woke up thinking, "buy Burl's book!" Friends, I think Burl is sending us subliminal messages - as opposed to the sublime ones we usually find from him. How do I buy Burl's book. If I don't like it, can I get a refund? As for Ahang's comment about the fewness of numbers of "strong women" in the Faith today as compared to the days of Abdu'l Baha and Shoghi Effendi, I think I can see what he means. In the earlier days of the Faith, women of the leisure classes were very strong voices in the Faith. From the information that I have, they seem to have not been burdened with having to support families, etc. I think that circumstances have changed, not the women. Women are generally so burdened with work outside the home that any type of volunteer efforts have to take a back seat to religious, school, and community activities. Certainly the down side of women being involved in the work place has been the decrease in their time for volunteering in communities. \ As for the complaints about cranky messages on Talisman, perhaps if there was some place where we could openly discuss matters, bring matters to the attention of institutions without having our letters posted for all the world to see, could ask questions and be given sensible, respectful answers, etc., we would be sweeter tempered. I don't think that all of those who grumble on Talisman are just a bunch of poor losers or self-centered brats who want their own way. Most of us have simply seen too many good people cast aside, too many fine efforts destroyed, and too few options for trying to resolve grievances. When your ox has been gored badly enough, you might understand. Linda From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzMon Oct 30 11:39:56 1995 Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 14:04:04 +1300 (NZDT) From: Robert Johnston To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Americans as refugees Ffolks, In recent postings Ahang stated that he (1) valued pilgrims notes, and (2) knew of pilgrims notes which foretold dire things for America. Now, for me, something doesn't add up here. If I believed that I was living in place that was hell-bound, then wouldn't I go and live somewhere else? Maybe Ahang is of the view that Texas isn't in America. But I'd like to hear from him about this, anyway. Robert. From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Oct 30 11:40:35 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 19:13:01 -0500 From: Ahang Rabbani To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Why I live in America. [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII] Dear Robert, You wrote: > In recent postings Ahang stated that he (1) valued pilgrims notes, > and (2) knew of pilgrims notes which foretold dire things for > America. Now, for me, something doesn't add up here. If I believed > that I was living in place that was hell-bound, then wouldn't I go > and live somewhere else? Maybe Ahang is of the view that Texas isn't > in America. But I'd like to hear from him about this, anyway. Firstly, let me go on record stating my belief in independence of the country of Texas. ;-} If interested, my plan is to eventually leave the States and go back to Iran, but not for any concern about the dire things anticipated for this country. There are compelling personal reasons which would require my family to settle in Iran when the situation there has returned to normal, which may not even be in my life time. What Shoghi Effendi was anticipating was the fulfillment of Baha'u'llah's prophecy about a unforeseen calamity and America is simply part of it. There is no guarantee that anywhere in the world, including New Zealand, will escape this divine chastisement. In fact, Shoghi Effendi said so specifically many times. For example, when Isobel Sabri asked him if Nirobi, Kenya, be safe, he said emphatically, no! (She was living in Kenya at the time.) If there is going to be a world-wide convulsion, where you're going to escape to? So, we better put it out of our minds and get on with life, because there is nothing else to do. Besides, there is the question of *when* will this calamity come. Well obviously noone knows. But clearly Shoghi Effendi seemed to indicate that we are far from it now and it will come when the world needs to go from the stage of Confederation of nations to world Federation. He used the analogy of the US Civil War in which the states were "welded together" as the result of the fire of Civil War, he says. So, some kind of firey ordeal seems to lie ahead that will cause this world Federation to emerge. Based on his writings, the soonest we can expect this to happen is perhaps 4-7 centuries down the road. It certainly ain't about the happen in our life time. It is not logical. To begin with, the humanity as a whole must be confronted with the message of Baha'u'llah and then consciously and collectively reject it. Otherwise why should it be punished? Just because a few people didn't want to go to our boring firesides?! Further, what would be the purpose of a huge destruction now? The first thing that evaporates would be the Baha'i Faith itself. Its so superficially established now that it can't survive anything remotely like a destruction that would kill 2/3 of world population (Biblical prophecy which Shoghi Effendi says would be fulfilled someday.) Ergo, for the sake of the Baha'i community itself God will not send it anytime in the next couple of centuries, which seems the minimum time needed for the community to get firmly established in the world to be able to withstand a shock like that. To answer your question, while I believe down the road there are dire things in store for America and indeed the entire northern hemisphere as Shoghi Effendi says, don't believe we need to worry about it as its a long, long time after all of us are gone. So, let's party! love, ahang. From JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduMon Oct 30 11:41:27 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 22:41:16 EWT From: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Catastrophes If anybody is in doubt about the reality of a catastrophe engulfing America, he should talk to our kids' teenage friends or read some of the papers I get in the course I teach on "The Pursuit of Happiness." A quite horrible ethical disaster has overwhelmed these kids, caused mostly by the moral choices of their parents' generation. I can go through a stack of 25 papers explaining the student's view of happiness, three quarters of them girls, and find none of them mentioning children or family as an ingredient of happiness, and only one mentioning sex--and that as the closest image of true happiness, which that student held to be unattainable. I think we can stop worrying about colorful disasters with nuclear weapons. John Walbridge From dpeden@imul.comMon Oct 30 11:41:33 1995 Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 06:48:44+030 From: Don Peden To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: sacrificing children Dear Timothy: Thank you for the aplogy. Although you did not direct your comments to us personally, when you use a shot gun to kill a rat, the shot tends to hit more than the rat. Your comments opened up old wounds that were just starting to heal. One interesting thing which has come up, however, is the relationship between pioneers and their "home" communities. I don't think that many communities who have people who "arise to pioneer" from their ranks consider adequately the responsibility they still maintain to those pioneers. I have often seen a relationship between the ability of pioneers to function and face difficulties and the amount of moral and physical support they receive from their home communities. Vulnerability, again. Thanks, Bev. From mfoster@tyrell.netMon Oct 30 11:42:00 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 21:48:25 -0600 (CST) From: "Mark A. Foster" To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Science & Religion To: talisman@indiana.edu Philip Belove wrote to talisman@indiana.edu: B >It's a troublesome statement because I don't believe it is B >scientifically correct. Or at least that it is highly unlikely to be B >scientifically correcty. So If Baha'ullah's station depends on his B >scientific infallibility, I'm in a lot of trouble as far as my faith B >is concerned. Hi, Philip - I enjoyed reading your posting. With regard to ETs on every planet , I, personally, doubt that, too. Certainly, there is no evidence that there are any creatures on any of the other planets in our solar system - which is what the passage would seem to literally imply - and much evidence to the contrary. While I would not want to dismiss it out of hand, I would also not want, as a layman, to walk into a meeting of professional astronomers and (deja vu _War of the Worlds_) announce that there were life forms on Mars! ;-) As I said on this list a number of months ago, I think that one meaning of the statement is, in parablical form, to teach us (possibly using an already existing tradition?) something about the purpose of the universe - as a matrix for life. Also, I think that Baha'u'llah is speaking from a God's-eye viewpoint, so to speak, and, in the Kingdom of Manifestation (the Greater World), time, as we know it, does not exist. Because there is no life on Mars, or Jupiter, or Vulcan presently, does not mean there never has been - or that there may not be in the future (either indigenous or colonized and even under artificial environmental conditions). Perhaps a future Prophet will be explain it. With loving regards, Mark * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion * * From Member1700@aol.comMon Oct 30 11:43:35 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 23:02:46 -0500 From: Member1700@aol.com To: Talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Reforms in Baha'i Administrations I had said: > Anyway, I am more and more disturbed by the insistance of some > Talismanians that no individual has any right to object to the decisions > of a Baha'i institution on the grounds that they are unjust And the reply was: I have not seen, on Talisman, any post that said this. What has appeared on Talisman, from time to time, is the idea that criticism should be done in such a way that it shows respect for the institution, that it does not undermine the authority and prestige which are the right of the institutions, that criticism not consist of imputation of base motives to members of these institutions, that criticism should not express the idea that "if only those NSA members understood the Faith as well as I do, everything would be alright." Well, if that is what is being said, I will certainly agree with it completely. In fact, I think that one would be hard pressed to find anyone who would disagree. So, are we talking about a straw man here? Of course, criticisms of the institutions should be delivered in the most polite and gentle language that the individual can muster at the time. But, then we can all agree (can we not?) that no one is ever going to do that perfectly, and that most will do it quite imperfectly. And so, of the tone of the criticism is always going to be the issue and not the substance, we will never get anywhere--because everyone's style, tone, language, choice of adjectives, etc., etc. will always be open to criticism. And so, to say that criticism can only be directed at the institutions of the Faith when it is expressed perfectly, is precisely the same thing as saying that it cannot be made at all. But, my larger problem with all this--as I have expressed over and over on Talisman, ad nauseum, I am sure--is that this conception of the relationship between the institutions and the community leaves no room at all for civil discourse or for civil society. That is, there is no conception here of an area of discourse in the Baha'i community about matters of general concern that is not a letter from an individual to a particular institution. Civil discourse, which is the basis of all democratic societies and all modern discourse, requires that there be an area of public discussion which is beyond the control and concern of government. It consists of all areas of activity which are not private, but are not controlled or overseen by the state--newspapers, publishing, theatre, political parties, and yes the internet. It would seem to me, that in the conception of some of my fellow Talismanians, there should be no such thing in a Baha'i society--or in the current Baha'i community. The society that they invision is a classic totalitarian state in which the individual stands isolated before government--in this case, the institutions of the Faith, with no intervening society or group or institution at all, with the possible exception of the family. Frankly, I find this conception of the future grotesque, and I want no part of it. I find it directly contradicted by endless statements in the writings of the Faith--some of which Juan has recently referred to, and indeed the result of naive and puerile thinking. It seems quite strange to me that in the aftermath of the collapse (from their own weight) of the greatest experiments in totalitarianism, there should be such a sustained call within the Baha'i community to reestablish one--based on appeals to the Covenant. Ugh! Warmest, Tony Tony From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzMon Oct 30 11:47:32 1995 Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 17:58:19 +1300 (NZDT) From: Robert Johnston To: Member1700@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: Reforms in Baha'i Administrations Warmest, Tony wrote: Frankly, I find this conception of the future grotesque, and I want >no part of it. I find it directly contradicted by endless statements in the >writings of the Faith--some of which Juan has recently referred to, and >indeed the result of naive and puerile thinking. It seems quite strange to >me that in the aftermath of the collapse (from their own weight) of the >greatest experiments in totalitarianism, there should be such a sustained >call within the Baha'i community to reestablish one--based on appeals to the >Covenant. Ugh! While on one level vituperative language does pursuade, on another it is simply finger pointing at God. The question is: which level is more scholarly? Naive and puerile? Hmmmm! Rather cool, Robert. From TLCULHANE@aol.comMon Oct 30 11:47:48 1995 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 23:59:46 -0500 From: TLCULHANE@aol.com To: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: American catastrophes Dear Friends, Gosh it is not often that i get to question or disagree with Ahang twice in one week ! :) My view of catastrophes is best expressed by John's comments ; it is an ethical one and we are in the midst of it . My reading of Shoghi Effendi is on two levels the pre WW2 Guardian and the post war Guardian . There is a difference in * tone* in these two time periods at least in the Guardians English writings. The 1930s gave us the WOB letters, AdJ and PDIC . The first outlining a philosophy of history among other things . ADJ is an ethical exhortation to American Bahai's which addressed three issues that would cause great turmoil for the U. S. 1) rectitude of conduct - and the plitical corruption associated with its lack or to use a phrase from _Turning Point _ the view that leadership was a path to privilege rather than a means of service . 2) Chastity or sexual morality , family values in the best sense of that word . 3) prejudice both racial , religious and class . Now it seems fairly obvious to me that we are reaping the consequences of not addressing those issues as a nation . In short we stand in the middle of a catastrophe of massive dimensions related to *corruption * and the lack of trust it breeds ; the sacrifice of human sexuality and family relationships to the ethos of materialism and the dominance of the marketplace ; the class betrayal of democracy ; the raging gulf between races ( increasingly a class issue in my view ) and the polarization of competing religions all holding to their *one way * view of reality . An issue that seems to be to be played out , unfortunately . on Talisman as well . No need to wait for fireballs from the sky now or centuries from now . The post war Guardian's English writings semm to me to take on a sense of foreboding , the Bahai version of the American "Jeremiad" a long and venarable tradition in American religious history. I see in this post war period a Shoghi Efffendi deeply disappointed that WW2 did not usher in the millenium of world federation which his pre-war writing expected - see Promised Day is Come. It is this post war period that Shoghi Effendi 's writings refect the *catastrophe* discussions taken up by American pilgrims who clearly thought this "event" was just around the corner,. even though the Guardian refused to specify a time . If Ahang is aware of some time frame given by the Guardian 4-7 centuries out I hope he will share it with us . My own feeling is partly from encountering the pilgrims notes version of catastrophe that has contributed in my mind to the the lack of growth in the community . I might add that in 1990 this version was alive and well in Omaha Nebraska. Who needs to teach , transform or anything else when God is going to come along and clean up this mess shortly. And Omaha did n't. That as many of you know has changed . I can not speak for other civilizations apocalyptic traditions but Western Civilization has a long , long, long one as in about 2800 years . It also has a distinctively American variety . Part of my prompting to study this aspect of Western and American religious history was precisely this obsession with *catastrophes * among a significant section of American Bahai's . Shoghi Efendi's witings , in my view , need to be understood against this backdrop of WW2 and disallusionment with humanity . He was the Guardian , he was also human and subject to the same sorrows and joys and hopes of the rest of us . I do not expect now or centuries from now nor do I believe that God is going to sweep in and zap humanity for rejecting Baha u llah any more than I believe the various Christian versions of this story currently extant . I do not find God zapping humans at any point in human history for the rejecting of the Manifestations . What I do find is HUMANITY zapping itself in the ethical foot for not paying attention to the requirements of the " .changeless Faith of God ." It is this "ethical " ignorance that is the cause of our suffering and will continue to be with ever increasing consequences to the fabric of the human social order . It is our responsibility as humans in the "age of maturity" to grow up and assume responsibility for the Revelations we have been given and not wait for God to come along and do it for us . warm regards , Terry From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzMon Oct 30 11:47:58 1995 Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 18:39:16 +1300 (NZDT) From: Robert Johnston To: TLCULHANE@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: American catastrophes Terry wrote: > I do not expect now or centuries from now nor do I believe that God is >going to sweep in and zap humanity for rejecting Baha u llah any more than I >believe the various Christian versions of this story currently extant . I do >not find God zapping humans at any point in human history for the rejecting >of the Manifestations . What I do find is HUMANITY zapping itself in the >ethical foot for not paying attention to the requirements of the " >.changeless Faith of God ." How can we genuinely distinguish between humanity zapping itself and God zapping humanity? Did I not read somewhere that the two nuclear explosions there were, effectively, an announcement of the Faith in Japan? All events serve God's purposes, and is not God "the All-Powerful" anyway? Humanity zapps itself only because God lives and Is Who He Says He Is. Anyhow: maybe Omaha is blessed, like Texas. Mystically, Robert. From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpMon Oct 30 11:48:09 1995 Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 15:39:29 JST From: "Stephen R. Friberg" To: TLCULHANE@aol.com Cc: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: American catastrophes Dear Terry: Enjoyed your post. You wrote: > I do not ... believe that God is going to sweep in and zap humanity... You also wrote: > What I do find is HUMANITY zapping itself in the ethical foot > for not paying attention to the requirements of the "changeless > Faith of God ." It is this "ethical " ignorance that is the > cause of our suffering and will continue to be with ever increasing > consequences to the fabric of the human social order . My question is: Is there really a difference? Why do you make such a big distinction between these two kinds of zappings? Yours, Steve F. From TLCULHANE@aol.comMon Oct 30 11:51:07 1995 Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 01:55:40 -0500 From: TLCULHANE@aol.com To: robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nz Cc: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: American catastrophes Dear Robert , Hmm ! There are a number of American triumphalists who would agree that the droppping of two atomic bombs on Japan were Divine retribution for the attack on Pearl Harbor . Being somewhat inclined to mysticism myself, my perception is that two nation states clinging to the " obsolescent doctrine of absolute national sovereignity . ." zapped and shot themselves and several million human being in the process. The ALL - Powerful had already served notice that " . . the earth is but one country and mankind its citizens ." Alas we , that is us humans neglected to listen and alas we , us humans , took care of the rest . God did not need to intervene - we contravened the structure of Reality ! I liked your post !! :) mystically yours , Terry From TLCULHANE@aol.comMon Oct 30 11:51:21 1995 Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 02:12:25 -0500 From: TLCULHANE@aol.com To: friberg@will.brl.ntt.jp Cc: talisman@indiana.edu Subject: Re: American catastrophes Dear Stephen , Glad you lked it . The reason I make the distinction is 1) I dont want to presume to *know * the will of God . See my respose to Robert. Humans are notorious for asuming God is on their side . 2) For better or worse I do *believe * we have free will . This has a corallary - the Manifestation articulates for us a vision of the nature of *Reality* and attempts to persuade us rather than coerce us into living in accord with that *Reality*. The choice is ours with all the atendent consequences and importantly the attendent responsibilities associated with our free will . It is up to us learn "heart surrender " as Baha u llah says in the Iqan that we might " . soar , on the wings of certitude , into the heaven of the love of your Lord the All -Merciful ." the responsibility for "observing " rests with us or more coloquially the buck stops with us . It is part and parcel of the age of maturity . warmest regards , terry