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 Peden
To: 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
Return to Talisman
Translation Page
Baha'i Studies Page
J. Cole Home Page
WebMaster: Juan R.I. Cole
jrcole@umich.edu