From cbuck@ccs.carleton.caMon Oct 30 11:51:49 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 2:22:11 EST
From: Christopher Buck
To: Ahang Rabbani
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Number of Tablets
Dear Ahang: 30 October 1995
A splendid, informative post! In which issue of `Andalib was
this report reprinted, pray tell?
Considering that the bulk of Baha'u'llah's revelation is
correspondence, do you or anyone on Talisman adhere to a *canon within
canon* perspective on these writings, in which the more formally
universal Tablets (Tarazat, Tajalliyat, Ishraqat, Bisharat, etc.)
clearly have a much higher relative importance?
Among Baha'u'llah's untranslated Tablets, which would you consider
to be of comparable importance to the Tablets I've just mentioned?
Finally, to the extent that Baha'u'llah is reiterative in His
correspondence, what is the likelihood that anything *new* in terms of
Baha'u'llah's teachings remains to be discovered? In other words, have
Baha'u'llah's Writings been sufficiently represented in the
translations we now have (such as the beloved Guardian's own
selections in _Gleanings_)?
Or are we in for some major surprises?
-- Christopher Buck
**********************************************************************
**********************************************************************
From mfoster@tyrell.netMon Oct 30 11:52:21 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 01:28:16 -0600 (CST)
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Reforms in Baha`i Admin.
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Robert Johnston wrote to Talisman@indiana.edu:
R>While on one level vituperative language does pursuade, on another it is
R>simply finger pointing at God. The question is: which level is more
R>scholarly? Naive and puerile? Hmmmm!
Robert -
I agree with you that name-calling does not contribute to genuine
understanding. As I read the Guardian, the Baha'i administration
contains elements of all the various political systems. It would no more
be correct to say that the Baha'i administrative system was completely
democratic than to say it was fully autocratic or monarchic. Certainly,
however, many of the most admirable features of historical governments,
and more, can be seen in the Baha'i world order model.
From democracy, we have the emphasis on freedom of expression, of
religion, and of the press - as well as the concept of one person, one
vote. From monarchism we have the _principle_ of the hereditary Valiyat
(Guardianship) as well as the promise of a resurrected kingship
dedicated to the service of humanity (as one of the signs of our
collective spiritual maturity). From dictatorial regimes, we see the
stress placed on the freedom of conscience of the members of
consultative bodies who are not bound to represent the agendas of any
particular constituencies. From republicanism, we find the requirement
that the elected institutions of the Faith familiarize themselves with
the needs of the believers and take into consideration the diverse
viewpoints of community members in their deliberations.
The Baha'i world order model is a part of Baha'u'llah's "new
creation." However, as with many dimensions of the Baha'i teachings,
aspects of existing systems can be observed within it. By the same
token, the Baha'i order will be no mere representation of any particular
governmental polity. It is a new, creative, and ever-evolving synthesis
of *apparently* contradictory approaches framed in the Universal Mind.
Loving greetings,
Mark
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion *
___
* UniQWK #2141* Structuralists Know the Lingo ;-)
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzMon Oct 30 11:52:30 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 20:46:44 +1300 (NZDT)
From: Robert Johnston
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: formidable explosion
[The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set]
[Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set]
[Some characters may be displayed incorrectly]
Ffolks,
Earlier I wrote: "Did I not read somewhere that the two nuclear explosions
there were, effectively, an announcement of the Faith in Japan?" OK, below
is the passage by 'Abdu'l-Baha from which I inferred this. I read the
passage nearly 20 years ago and -- clearly -- my "interpretation" -- now,
equally clearly, only dimly remembered -- was imaginative. But, I am not
yet ready to concede that it was not fundamentally correct!
Perversely,
Robert.
"Japan Will Turn Ablaze!" Tablets of `Abdu'l-Bahá, Letters of Shoghi Effendi
and the Universal House of Justice, and Historical Notes About Japan,
compiled by Barbara R. Sims, pp. 38-39:
(August 19, 1920. Translated by Azizullah Bahadur)
"In Japan the divine proclamation will be heard as a
formidable explosion , so that those who are ready will become uplifted
and illumined by the Light of the Sun of Truth. (August 19, 1920)"
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzMon Oct 30 11:52:35 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 21:02:32 +1300 (NZDT)
From: Robert Johnston
To: TLCULHANE@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: catastrophic reasoning?
Dear Terry,
Good thing that most of America is asleep! You wrote:
"I dont want to presume to *know *
>the will of God" . ... [Adding that] "It is part and parcel of the age of
>maturity" [to accept personal responsibility] .
My response is this: It is function of my maturity to seek out the workings
of God in every aspect of my life, so that in my pain, I seek evidence of
God's chastisement; in my pleasure, evidence of His good-pleasure; in my
pain evidence of his good-pleasure; and in my pleasure evidence of his
chastisment. Don't you do that? Is this kind of activity a function of my
perversity?
;-}
Robert.
From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Oct 30 12:01:13 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 07:02:01 -0500
From: Ahang Rabbani
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: catastrophe
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
I'm sorry I opened this can of warms. My good intention was try
to ally fears of calamity being around the corner and happening
before the "lesser peace" stuff, which one hears too often and
has a paralyzing effect on the believers, especially the youth.
But I think it would be helpful to note that actually two types
of "calamity" or "catastrophes" are referred to in our writings.
1. A continual degeneration of society, as John and Terry have
discussed, which one many call "calamity as a process".
2. A single event which Baha'u'llah emphasize to be "unforeseen
calamity". (Shoghi Effendi says it will take place in matter of
few hours, you get up in the morning (if you get up in the
morning!) and its over!)
Clearly, as a Baha'i community we can impact the first type and
try to lessen its effect. This after all is the stuff related to
the "minor plan of God" and gradually the influence of the Faith
will impact it more. But right now we all live with this
continual calamity.
As far as the second single event is concerned, that's part of
the "major plan of God" and there is nothing that humanity or the
Faith can do about it. Besides, I think discussing the specifics
of something that Baha'u'llah refers to as "unforeseen" is
basically a waste of time. He does what He willeth.
While these two type of calamities (one as a process, the other
as a single event) may be related in some intricate way, Shoghi
Effendi shows that the first kind brings down the existing old
world order, while the second one will serve the Faith -- how, I
don't know, perhaps as he says through welding disjointed members
of a world confederation into a federation.
Anyway, my point is that we should keep these two things separate
in our minds and shouldn't also be so quick dismissing something
that Baha'u'llah has so emphatically warned us about, i.e. some
kind of world convulsion, but also recognize that it has really
nothing to do with the next few generations and besides there is
nothing we can do about it -- its in His Hands.
regards, ahang.
From snoopy@skipper.physics.sunysb.eduMon Oct 30 12:01:36 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 10:04:13 -0500 (EST)
From: Stephen Johnson
To: Ahang Rabbani
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: catastrophe
Dearest Ahang,
You said that calamities were of two types:
> 1. A continual degeneration of society, as John and Terry have
> discussed, which one many call "calamity as a process".
>
> 2. A single event which Baha'u'llah emphasize to be "unforeseen
> calamity". (Shoghi Effendi says it will take place in matter of
> few hours, you get up in the morning (if you get up in the
> morning!) and its over!)
There is also another calamity that the Blessed Guardian elaborated upon
which touches even closer to home:
> Vicious criticism is indeed a calamity . But its root is lack of faith in
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> the system of Bahá'u'lláh (i.e. the administrative order) and lack of
> obedience to Him--for He has forbidden it. If the Bahá'ís would follow
> the Bahá'í laws in voting, in electing, in serving, and in abiding by
> assembly decisions, all this waste of strength thru criticizing others
> could be diverted into cooperation and achieving the Plan. Keep on trying
> to point this out to them! --Arohanui, by Shoghi Effendi p.52
Granted, this was written by one of the Guardian's secretaries and not by
the pen of Shoghi Effendi himself...yet, it appears to me to shed some
more light on to the topic of what a calamity is ... vicious attacks from
*inside* the folds of the Faith...the believers themselves doing damage
to the Faith.
Just a simple thought from this poor student of yours,
stephen
From LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.eduMon Oct 30 12:01:44 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 10:01:40 EWT
From: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Found Burl, but...
John's and Terry's postings on "the end of the world" were terrific. I was
especially glad that Terry laid the responsibility on us and not on God to take
care of things. People have been attributing everything to divine intervention
since the beginning of time and look what has happened. The teachings in the
Baha'i writings are our guidelines. Baha'i law says that we should shun drugs
and alcohol. We don't have to wait for God to punish us for breaking these
laws. We are simply hurting ourselves by doing so. We are supposed to treat
marriage as a sacred institution and seek parents' consent for a marriage
partner. If everyone were following such laws, we might not have teenagers and
college students mourning over the neglect they experience. Students come to
me to tell me that there are no adults in their lives for them to speak to;
that their parents have disowned them, etc.
To me there is a big difference between waiting for God to send the big
catastrophe and acknowledging that we are in the midst of creating it.
As for responses to Tony's posting, I don't think that Tony is advocating
vituperative speech. He made a good point. We all have different styles of
speaking and writing. Most Middle Easterners would think that the American
letter-writing style is a abrupt and ill-mannered. We don't start off with
sentence after sentence of polite formalities, for example. Most Americans
would see M.E. letter-writing style as appearing unctuous. Within cultures
there is tremendous variation (as we can see on Talisman). This obsession with
"tone" can really be a problem in allowing for expression of ideas. Linda
From rvh3@columbia.eduMon Oct 30 12:02:28 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 09:55:33 -0500 (EST)
From: Richard Vernon Hollinger
To: JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Catastrophes
I quite agree with John, the castrophe is here, not quite in the form we
may have expected. In my neighborhood in New York, almost every teenage
girl has at least one child (it boosts their self-esteem, I am told), and I
often wonder what will be the social consequences of this trend a couple of
decades from now.
Although I have not systematically studies the Guardians words on the
catastrophe(s), it does appear that his vision of this changed in
response to changing socio-political conditions in the world. At
different times he stated (in pilgrims' notes, at least) that the
catastrophe in America would consist of primarily material or mental tests.
However, during the beginnings of the Cold War, he seems to have
anticipated a nuclear war between the Soviet Union and the United
States, as did other political observers of the time. He told
one group of pilgrims that the East and West coasts of the U.S. would be
immobilized by Russian submarines, and at another time listed a number of
U.S. cities that would be "evaporated" in during the conflagration.
These were genuine possiblities in late 1940's and early 1950's, and
other Baha'is seem to have been convinced of this outcome even before
Shoghi Effendi. Charles Mason Remey, for example, was in 1947-1948
carefully transferring his investments out of companies whose assets were
located on the coasts because he believed they would not survive the
nuclear war he believed was coming.
Richard Hollinger
On Sun, 29 Oct 1995 JWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu wrote:
> 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 dhouse@cinsight.comMon Oct 30 12:03:34 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 07:02:27 -0800
From: "David W. House"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: reforms
Ahang, friends,
>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.
While I would not have it assumed that I am arguing against it (indeed I
hope this post by itself will not offer sufficient information to be able to
infer my thought about this) even data which demonstrated that all members
had died in office after repeated elections would not demonstrate the
propsition, for it would not be predictive. For example, I believe that, for
many years, it was true that the U.S. House of Representatives had a higher
degree of incumbancy than Britians House of Lords, which, as I understand
it, is essentially an appointative body. (My ignorance is vast: I am not
speaking as a result of my own studies, merely imperfectly parroting news
reports that I remember from years past.) However, this trend has been
recently shattered.
To offer another example, it should be clear that simply because a child
plays with toys everyday, and even if this tragic circumstance can be
statistically proven in a careful presentation replete with charts and
graphs, this would, as we all know, have a poor predictive value about the
child's future behavior.
>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.
"Disasterous", regardless if they all died as a result, is simply
pejorative. Will the Blessed Beauty be more pleased (I am asking for
opinions, not farmans) with those who have taught and "failed", or those who
have never taught at all?
Further: Its Monday early morning as I write this. I had the great pleasure
of spending this weekend with a group of distinguished Baha'is (excepting of
course that I brought the average level of distinction down precipitously),
and Juana Conrad, member of the NSA, was among them. I was one participant
in a discussion during which she shared some information about Houston and
its EBT process. Her report, as passed on to you through this notoriously
unreliable reporter, was that the NSA met with the Houstonians and were most
emphatic about the thought that teaching must continue. Further the LSAs
should return to their chambers and consult about the sources of the
disunity which had recently risen, and decide what to do about it. Reports
of the death of this process (with apologies to Samuel Clemons), may be
exagerated.
One thing which should be clear regarding such processes as that occuring in
Houston is that experimentation is essential; if there were anyone in the
U.S. who had perfect knowledge regarding how to do EBT, we would have it. In
fact, however, this sentence implies something which is false, because EBT
cannot be the result of transferrable knowledge of the sort implied: rather
it must be the result of the maturation of local and national institutions,
and of the individuals involved in the process.
For example, EBT is bound to be a messy process, occuring across
jurisdictional boundries, involving us in the problems that new believers
bring into the Cause with them, challenging previous ideas of the veteran
believers (particularly ideas those which awaited such circumstances before
they were of situational significance), and placing the whole system under
some pressure, at which point it will begin to leak in places it has not
previously leaked.
As such, it is clear that the road will be rough, and problems will arise:
disunity will often be among these problems, and where present will
certainly exacerbate all of them. Whether EBT processes in various metro
areas founder and experience these problems is, therefore, not really open
to question: they will. Such teaching efforts will only stop, however, if we
allow them to stop. The paradigm, it seems to me, and barring only that the
local Institutions do not decide to stop it, is that the teachers and
administrators involved in the process *must* be willing to suffer,
unjustly, as the price to be paid to be part of such a glorious process.
Those who find themselves unable or unwilling to suffer, unjustly, will not
be a part of such processes, or may be insturmental in stopping them.
I would also say that we should be careful to provide attribution, even for
rumors and second-hand information, as I have tried to do above. It could
easily inhibit the processes involved if such rumors are given the patina of
authority and the presumption of truth by virtue of having come through a
computer. Please (and I know that some will gladly oblige my request) apply
these same caveats to this post: what I have reported may be wildly
inaccurate, and cannot be taken as gospel, and my opinions are guarenteed to
be flawed. Any truth they contain (purely by statistical accident due to the
number of words involved, I hasten to add) will be both over- and understated.
d.
David William House (dhouse@cinsight.com)
"Well is it with the doers of great deeds." Abdu'l-Baha
From cbuck@ccs.carleton.caMon Oct 30 12:03:48 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 9:52:52 EST
From: cbuck@ccs.carleton.ca
To: Ahang Rabbani
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: catastrophe
Ahang writes:
^^^^^^^^^^^^
As far as the second single event is concerned, that's part of
the "major plan of God" and there is nothing that humanity or the
Faith can do about it.
____________
RESPONSE:
The only text in which I've seen the beloved Guardian indicate
otherwise is, if memory serves, in _Messages to America_, in which
Baha'is may *hasten the Lesser Peace* and decrease humanity's
suffering thereby! (As I do not have *Refer* or *Mars*, I'm sorry that
I cannot post this text.) The significance of this passage, to me, is
that the Guardian speaks to an interrelationship between the Major and
Minor Plans of God, in which Baha'is have a potentially greater role
to play in the Major Plan of God than is usually thought.
-- Christopher Buck
**********************************************************************
* * * * * *
* * * Christopher Buck Invenire ducere est.
**********************************************************************
From TLCULHANE@aol.comMon Oct 30 12:03:55 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 10:39:57 -0500
From: TLCULHANE@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: catastrophe
Dear Aghang and all ,
As I recall Abdul Baha addressed the "unforseen calamity" issue and
links it to WW1 . I do not find any evidence of a single * event * that is to
occur . I am more than open to such evidence being provided . You have not
opened a can of worms . This isue does have a debilitating affect on youth .
In a larger sense it has to do with ones interpretation of prophetic
statements. I , obviously , do not interpret such statments as an event . I
think they are rhetorical -, in the best sense - they are allegorical as well
. They have profound spititual and ethical significance . There is a tendency
in the English language because of its penchant for subject, object ,
predicte structure to percieve what are essentially relationships between
phenomenon as discrete things or events .
There is also a long history among religious communities of millenial
thinking . The Shiite and Christian versions being perhaps most pronounced
and , of cousre , I would argue that intellectually the community has been
dominated by descendents of Shiites and Christians. These descendents have
carried in with them those respective understandings of how God operates in
the world .
The millenial *event* has already occurred . Baha ullah has appeared on the
planet ! That humanity has failed to respond is cause for disappointment and
anguish . I do not see that it is cause for interpreting Bahau lah to mean
that God is going to send a catastrophic *event * to wake up humanity when
the Presence of the Glory of God did not do so . There is a point in the
Iqan which is relevent here . Baha ullah is addressing the Christian
symbolism of return in the cloude and so forth. It is in the conterxt of
tests and can br found about page 50 . In critiquing the literal notion of
coming on the clouds , He remarks that were this to happen noone would be
capable of believing o rnot believing . This , in turn , would be contrary to
the method of God . How could His true lovers be recognized ? that for me is
the real point . It is about lovers coming to their Beloved.
We can pursue this mattter further with swords when we meeet in the
capital of the sovereign country of Texas in November. As for special places,
Texas huh ! My hero Abdul Baha visited Omaha while in America . I dont
think he made it as far south as . . . .. :)
warm regards ,
Terry
From dhouse@cinsight.comMon Oct 30 18:32:30 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 08:59:25 -0800
From: "David W. House"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Justice Belongs to Us
David ("beloved") Taylor,
At 03:52 PM 10/27/95 -0400, you wrote:
> Also, I do not use pseudonyms and have no reason to doubt that
>David House is a real person...
I have always thought of myself as such, but some of my friends would insist
that this merely proves the degree to which I am subject to vain imaginations...
In another post, you said:
>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.
Clearly this is correct, and my short phrase ("Establishing justice is the
exclusive purview of the institutions..."), shorn from its context, should
be subject to such revisions. Its difficult to remember to use phrases which
stand well on their own.
Terry (Culhane?),
At 02:12 AM 10/30/95 -0500, you wrote:
>For better or worse I do *believe * we have free will .
Wonderful post!
A common phrase you used has sparked a thought in me, however. "Free will"
is a facinating term, and one which, as time passes, makes less and less
sense to me, in a certain way. I refer to the idea that, in one very
important way, this apparent facility will be shorn from us when we enter
the next world. That is, the fact of the Manifestation will be as apparent
as the sun (forgive me for not being able to offer a reference for this
thought: I will try, if requested). The point is that we could say that we
no longer have "free will" with reference to this fundamental question after
death. Coupled with the idea that evil is a non-existance, lack, or misuse
of an existing capacity, and that all our virtues or existing capacities are
part of our soul and will be available to us after death, it is hard to see
how, if free will is an existing capacity, it could be "removed" from us.
I suggest that what we commonly refer to as free will is rather simple
ignorance, or veiling. If we know the stove is hot, and will cause us pain,
we won't touch it. If we understand that the source of happiness is virtue,
and that a lack thereof will lead to unhappiness, then surely we would make
the proper choice, when/if we attain to "certitude". If we understand the
nature of our Lord and our own nature, then to the degree that we
understand, we will act properly in relation to those realities, etc.
Mind you, Terry, I am not attempting to disagree with you. I hope this is
clear. Your point (if I understand it correctly) remains, which is that we
need to learn and grow, and as we do, we will, as you beautifully described
it "soar".
d.
David William House (dhouse@cinsight.com)
"Well is it with the doers of great deeds." Abdu'l-Baha
From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Oct 30 18:33:08 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 11:05:01 -0500
From: Ahang Rabbani
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: women
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Dear LuAnne,
Thanks for your kind note in which you wrote:
> 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?
I'll be very interested in this data too, so, if anyone has any
numbers to share, please help out.
I'm hoping that in not too distant a future, the World Centre
would begin to share this type of information more readily as
they are assembling a very rich Baha'i demographic database.
>From the type of the Hands and more formally with the election of
the House, all NSAs were required to report on semi-annual basis
a whole bunch of statistical information, including the total
number of believers in their community. From 1979, they were
asked to provide a great deal more details, such as divide the
total number into: adults (21 and over), youth (15-21) and
children (under 15 yrs old). Also to report this info by the
States (and not just country totals). In 1986, the World Centre
went a step further and asked that from that point on, info be
divided by male and female.
So, there is a great deal of Baha'i demographical information
assembled by the World Centre on every country of the world. But
I don't know of any data that would help with LuAnne's query.
regards, ahang.
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comMon Oct 30 18:35:07 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 10:03:28 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Secret and Symbol Book Review ! a repost.
Christopher Buck's new Book Symbol and Secret , is a
marvelous balanced discourse on the Kitab-i-Iqan < The Book of
Certitude > . Buck
has walked the fine line between academic requirements and not
compromising obvious
deeply held beliefs in the Blessed Beauty station in a manner that
warrants following .
For comparison purposes he switches from Arabic to Persian to German
and English
Sources with flair and skill . Although the book contains technical
terminology it reads
well and should have a wider appeal than just an Academic audience . It
is the first
attempt to take a major work of Baha'u'llah and apply academic
techniques to further
our understanding it . The result opens up a whole new and different
concept to this the
second most important work of Baha'u'llah , by placing it in its
correct historical and
religious background . He outlines the type of methodology employed
which enabled
this Work to be regarded as lucid , challenging and informative .
Taking the key verse
from the Quran 33.40 , Buck points out the use of 33.44 with that verse
opens up the
way for the Islamic acceptance of the New Manifestations of God , in a
new cycle of
Fulfillment . To quote from the book : ' Here , the single most crucial
prophetological
verse in the Quran is overruled , in Baha'u'llah's exegesis , by
another verse just four
verses later in the same sura . This latter verse is glossed as the
refraction of beautific
vision realized in the " Manifestation of God " who is the
eschatological "God" by
proxy , even as Moses was said to be "as God unto Pharaoh." Such an
exegesis is not
found in Twelver Shi'i tafsir. Further in the book Buck explores again
this theme
referring to pages 169-170 in the Kitab-i-Iqan , he shows this is one
of the more crucial
passages in that."This explanation resolves the problem of 'voice' in
scripture and in
the theophanic locutions of the prophets of God. The passage is self-
explanatory...........The Islamic doctrine of revelatory finality is
firmly predicated on
verse 33.40. This is the most crucial verse Baha'u'llah has to deal
with . In effect , the
entire Book of Certitude may be said to be an exegesis of Quran33.40."
Buck shows that from academic and theological standpoints the
Kitab-i-iqan is a
masterful work of redefining the way to interpret the meanings in
Religion and
therefore is a work of interpretation above all others . He makes the
observation that
Baha'u'llah chose to write this work in Persian not Arabic , thus it
became the banner
of the early believers . Armed with such knowledge they opened the door
for a new
way of understanding and following religion.
His choice of sources I found fascinating utilizing MacEoin < who is
hardly a friend of
the Faith > and Amanat < who regards the religion of the Bab as
essentially a result
of the social situation in Iran > with others . Dealing dispassionately
with these two
for example he is able to point out their contribution whilst
dismissing the flaws in their
augments . J. Wansborough's methodology for Quranic analysis as well as
though to a
lesser degree A. Rippon are the cornerstones of the academic
scholarship of this book.
I have a strong feeling Symbol and Secret could cause the study of
Islam to finally start
in the Baha'i Community . This book demonstrates the need to have a
firm grasp of the
finer points of Islamic Theology and thinking and a Love for the Quran
that is more
than lip service. A very fine first book < if I remember correctly > ,
Christopher
Buck has worked long and hard to bring a work to life that would add to
our knowledge
and understanding of this the Faith of the Twin Blessed Ones . I
believe he has done
just that and deserves every credit and thanks for doing so. A very
well recommended
addition for every Baha'i library and serious student of the Faith . it
is type of Book
that needs placing in University Libraries.
Symbol & Secret , Quran Commentary in Baha'u'llah's Kitab-i-Iqan .
Published by Kalimat Press Los Angeles
324 pages including bibliography and Appendix .
Price Hard Cover : $42.50
Soft Cover : $32.50
Chritopher Buck is coming to the ABS Conference to present a paper and
be available
for Book-signings . The Book-shop is open Thursday through Sunday until
1.30 pm tha
afternoon. The Special Author signing and reception is on Saturday
October 14th we have about 14 authors coming at the last count.
Christopher is one of
those who will be available to talk to people one on one about the Book
at :
The Assocation of Baha'i Studies Conference
The Hyatt Regency Hotel 1333 Bayshore Highway Burlingame CA 94010 .
Next to highway 101 and right by the SFO airport.
Kindest Regards Derek Cockshut
From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Oct 30 18:35:57 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 11:57:01 -0500
From: Ahang Rabbani
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: reforms (fwd)
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Attached note is from Rob Stockman which he meant for Talisman
but sent only to me. He asked for it to be forwarded. ahang.
**********
> ... the mathematics of a convention turning out any substantial
> number of sitting members are almost impossible ...
If the information I have received from Canada and Britain is correct, in
recent years there have been several spontaneous turnovers of membership on the
NSAs in those countries. Canada has 171 delegates, just like us; Britain I
think has 95. I think we can argue their electoral situation is analogous to
ours, though perhaps not their Baha'i subculture. But subculture is not where
statistical impossibility can lie.
The more important question, I think, is how does the Baha'i turnover rate
compare to the rate in elected bodies using western styles of election. I
believe I have heard the reelection rate to U.S. Congress is very high for
those who run for reelection; about 95% or 98%. This in spite of months of
screaming, yelling, and smearing each other, and millions of bucks spent on
image. If the two systems' reelection rates are not substantially different,
why bother with the disunity and silliness? At best it undermines the public's
confidence in their government; at worst, it generates ill feelings,
grandstanding, and legislative gridlock.
Perhaps Arash is lurking and can give us his considered opinion.
-- Rob Stockman
From Dave10018@aol.comMon Oct 30 18:36:17 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 13:25:04 -0500
From: Dave10018@aol.com
To: dhouse@cinsight.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Justice Belongs to Us--Naming Names!
In a message dated 95-10-30 12:15:29 EST, dhouse@cinsight.com (David W.
House) writes:
>Subj: Re: Justice Belongs to Us
>Date: 95-10-30 12:15:29 EST
>From: dhouse@cinsight.com (David W. House)
>Sender: owner-talisman@indiana.edu
>To: talisman@indiana.edu
>
>
>David ("beloved") Taylor,
>
>At 03:52 PM 10/27/95 -0400, you wrote:
>> Also, I do not use pseudonyms and have no reason to doubt that
>>David House is a real person...
>
>I have always thought of myself as such, but some of my friends would insist
>that this merely proves the degree to which I am subject to vain
>imaginations...
>
>In another post, you said:
>
>>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.
>
>Clearly this is correct, and my short phrase ("Establishing justice is the
>exclusive purview of the institutions..."), shorn from its context, should
>be subject to such revisions. Its difficult to remember to use phrases which
>stand well on their own.
Yes, sez I--the aforementioned David Taylor, a person of no importance but
some existence on the perilous east coast of the United States-- this is a
fine bit of writing and one, as I mentioned in the same post wherein I stated
that I am not David House, I agree with it too; however, I did not write it.
David Langness wrote it.He signed it this way"David (unity in Daversity)
Langness" In that post he quoted someone he seemed to think was me(I think it
may have been you, but I am not sure.) I replied that he had me confused with
someone else, and said, as above that I am not David House. Now, you quote
David Langness but attribute his remarks to me, even though he signed his
remarks with his full name! Argggh!!
I hope that clarifies things.
David Taylor of Hartford, Connecticut
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlMon Oct 30 18:42:10 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 20:32:01 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: response to dave taylor's post
FROM SONJA VAN KERKHOFF
In response to part of Dave's 23 Oct posting:
Re you discussion of symbolism: "....-in other words the symbolism
of the faith must move us at the deepest levels("touch our hearts").
Whatever practical effect a law or rule may have, it functions as a
symbol. Symbolic function may even take precedence over practical
effect, as the symbolic aspect is very important, even primary."
The only that I could interpret this part of argument is to see it as an
argument for practising equality.
I can see the following part of your argument re:
"Our Faith is rooted in the lineage of the Semitic religions of the
Middle East, the lineage of Abraham and Moses, of Jesus and
Mohammad, and this continuity is emphasized in the Kitab-i- Iqan and
many other places in the Writings. The Faith is making use
of and reshaping a system of symbols that is thousands of years old,
through which the idea of the Divine has become more and more
abstracted from literal conceptions while retaining our devotion. Its
continuity is one of its most basic features, symbolizing, for example,
continuity of purpose for human history and the ageless nature of
Divinity Itself."
Yes this is a sound justification for the sexism in the language of the
Writngs, although since Talisman I am now seeing this sexism perhaps
lying more in the way the Writings have been translated into English
rather than what could be drawn from the Writings. By this I mean the
various references to the feminine and the principle of mutatis mutandi,
that I feel has not had much attention, but that could be becuase those
who do the translating are not so concerned about these areas.
I do not see how connections/lineage with religious history would be
destroyed by the use of gender neutral language, or by expressing
feminine aspects of the divine, any more than the claim of Baha'u'llah
as a new messanger does.
"It is the interest of this continuity that significant remnants of earlier
customs and expressions linger in religion. Customs which have come
to seem barbaric are not simply abolished but replaced by less barbaric
practices which echo in their form the earlier practices."
This could be an argument for why there are no women on the
Universal House of Justice at the moment, and I think that that is
probably why, but in that light I see this more as a result of history
rather than being in the interest of continuity.
I think the principle of equality is far more radical than whether women
may serve on the Universal House of Justice or not, which is why this
issue is such a puzzle.
"As religion develops, these symbolic forms must be preserved in some
way without the prejudicial meanings which have been attached to them
owing to the incompleteness of human development."
I don't see how there will not be prejudice against women if they are
not able to practice full equality, and I have seen lots of examples
inciting the 'station' of the female mother or a 'woman's emotional
states' used as justification for this one instance of inequality in the
principles of the Bahai Faith, and then justification for further
inequality such as that mother SHOULD be the ones to mother the
children, etc.
"The impulse to throw out all symbolism tainted by sexism is
understandable, and many have symbolized their devotion to feminism
(a good cause!) by attempting to do so, but this impulse runs counter to
this organic method of development."
I interpret a rejection of sexism in a similiar light to a rejection of
racism. We are all racist and sexist and it is a matter of being conscious
of this and attempting to find ways so that we feel we are making some
difference to any situation where there is racism or sexism or injustice
of any kind. I believe this is a duty of every Bahai, (symbolically that
is!) while in practice the ways Bahais choose to do this are open and
diverse. My interpretation of progressive revelation is that change is
progressive. We move towards ideals, in practice (and symbollically).
So all I could say in repsonse to the above is that taking the male as
the norm (or worse, as the symbol of the divine!) is against the
principle of progressive relation.
"New forms grow out of old forms in such a way as to preserve
connection."
As an artist I find this a funny idea. New forms grow out of old forms
because that is where the artist/writer or whoever, is coming from.
Artists such as Cezanne, Picasso, even van Gogh or to mention some
more contemporary artists, John Cage, Meret Oppenheim, Eva Hesse, or
Joseph Beuys were concerned with discovery and search not
continuation. If one is worried about continuation, one is likely to
reproduce what already exists, which is fine if you want to make art
like Matisse did. He said he wanted his art to relax a man in an easy
chair [-this is from memory. I would be unable to back this up with
finding the source as my books are scattered amongst houses in New
Zealand.]
But I think you as an artist know how dangerous it is for creativity to
be dominated by a concern with retaining 'continuation'. Creative acts
are all about looking for the new, seeking, and moving on.
Here this is not to say seeking feminism or any other perspective would
necessarily be a 'new form'. In terms of 'forms' or 'symbolism' I don't
even know what feminist ones would be but rather for me, feminism is
a particular way of reading or looking, similiar to how I see the Bahai
Faith as a particular way of looking or reading the religious.
Of course it is then possible to see any form from a variety of
perspectives such as reading the Impressionist painter Mary Cassat as
painting women and children because that's all she had access to and
representing an Impressionist concern with depicting ordinary
contemporary events. Or you could see her images as symbolizing a
conscious attempt to bring women, and children to the attention of the
world/art world, or at least to be serious enough material for her to
choose to paint them. Either viewpoint could be backed up although I
would side with the latter viewpoint as being more representative of her
own intentions because she chose this particular subject matter whereas
if she was unaware of the political (symbolic) implications of this she
would have been painting whole families in drawing rooms, preening
women (as Degas did) or dancing postitutes (as Latrec did). That the
way she portrayed these women as engaged and at the same time as
having a life force of their own, indicates to me that a femininst
reading of her work would be in tune with her own intentions, whether
or not she would've chose to identify with feminism if she could have.
I see this being similiar to Tahirih who was not a suffragette but
certainly was working towards greater equality/or a voice for women.
But back to your point about continuity. Looking at Cassat's paintings,
it is clear that she is one of the impressionists because of the choice of
colour, use of loose brsuh stroke, etc. No one would have any question
locating her with the Impressionists except for the historians who just
happen to only refer to the male Impressionists, and you still find that
in any general survey. She and Berthe Morisot were as active (and
exhibited in the same exhibitions) as any of the 7 or 8 men who are
usually listed as being the Impressionist painters.
Ignoring the feminine or female presence in my view has been a mis-
representation of the practice of art history, so we are left on the whole
with the idea that artistic practice was a male domain and symbollically
so.
"to use ancient symbols but with greater awareness of their
symbolic--non-literal--nature. The image of the sovereign lord, the king,
remains, for example, as a symbol pointing to the nature of God,
without it being literally embodied any more in the ruler of every
walled city."
Symbol is a symbol, is a symbol, is a symbol (the thoroughly modernist
poet/art collector, Gertrude Stein, said 'a rose, is a rose, is a rose' and
these words have been up for grabs ever since).
You could argue that the sovereign Lord is a carpenter's son, a
fisherman, a maiden, a ruah (feminine spirit), a flame, a bird. I think
there is a lot of choice, and choosing a symbol with male associations
means choosing to portray the masculine. I am not saying it is bad to
do this, but reusing old symbols without change only reinforces it's
usual meaning. It's the new forms that change the associations.
"In any case the King of Glory has given us the task of using these
patriarchal symbols, including, apparently and at least for the
present, probably for much longer, a male House of Justice."
I don't see how having 9 men on the Universal House of Justice means
that we have to use patriarchal symbols, when there are so many
instances of the principle of equality in the Writings. Baha'u'llah was a
man but he used many titles, the nightingale being one of them.
"one of the basic functions of any religious system is to priviledge
questions of meaning above "practical" considerations. Any religious
system must have at its core symbolic statements which involve
sacrifice and which are priviledged above practical considerations."
I don't get what you mean here. A argument for
inconsistencies/misunderstanding as being ethically better than practices
that are consistent with belief? For me, and many I think, Prayer and
fasting is a VERY practical act and of use. The cause and effect may
not always be the same as dropping a ball but it is there, and certainly
is consistent with any principle of the Bahai Faith.
"Baha'is love to talk about what they see as the practical benefits of
their religion, as if even prayer and fasting were merely
practical measures, but they are not. Their importance is symbolic. If
nothing else, at least we can admit that martyrdom is not practical! To
view the rule barring women from the Universal House of Justice as
practical (the term I used in my earlier post was"rational") is to imply
that some incapacity of women or some inability of men in the
presence of women prevents a body with women on it from being
effective at that level.
I think you mean spiritual instead of symbollic in this sentence. I agree
that there isn't a practical or rational reason that I can see at the
moment for the exclusion of women, but invoking 'symbollism' as a
reason seems like you are dressing a wolf in sheep's clothing. I really
don't know what you mean when you use the word, symbollic.
"In seeking its meaning in its symbolic value, I
suggest it makes sense to consider this rule in the context of patriarchal
symbolism which refers to the Creator as Lord and King."
Interestingly, (thanks to Steve Scholl) it seems likely that Baha'u'llah's
references to the Creative Creator would likely to have followed the
Sufi practice of referring to a Divine She. It's present day Christianity
which focuses on a male God, not Bahai in my view.
"in speaking of the names and attributes of God, He has used
patriarchal metaphors again and again. He likens the Diety to a father,
to a lord or a king. These are patriarchal metaphors. In addition to
speaking of the "Men of the House of Justice" He mentioned a
preference for constitutional monarchy, saying that kings should not
have arbitrary power but still desiring the institution to continue
because "the majesty of kingship is one of the signs of God." The
persistence of patriarchal symbolism in the Writings is by itself enough
to arouse the skepticism of many who feel that as long as such
language is used men are priviledged above women, but the intent of
such patriarchal language in the Faith, I would suggest, is to retain its
authority as a symbol of the authority of that Inacessable Essence we
call God."
Since when has the quality of authority been solely a male preserve?
For me any use of maleness as a symbol for authority would be a
symbol of patriarchy. Surely this is not what you mean?
I interpret the word "rijal", as honoured ones, and you interpret this as
'men'. To argue which is the more accurate interpretation is an open
issue, and the source of much debate. It not clear which is the more
accurate. And that is why we have to look at other Bahai Writings (in
which the principles are imbedded just as concretely or symbollically
(choose your favourite abverb) as 'rijal' is.
"The male House of Justice is left as a final literal embodiment of the
image of Divine Father.(to be withdrawn someday?)"
If this is meant to mean that male members reflect a male God, then
there is nothing to support this view in the Writings as far as I know.
If this is your meaning, then I find this excludes me more than those
role-prescriptions which insist that, as a woman, I should devote most
of my energy to care-giving. At least a home-bound woman could pray
to Her for guidence.
"I suspect that as an archetypal relationship the father-child relationship
is more abstract, more remote than that between mother and child. The
image of the father seems to have been associated strongly with
monotheism as opposed to polytheism. This, at any rate, is the way the
worshippers of Ishtar and Baal were seen by the worshippers of
YHWH--the Hebrews. Also, the physical power of men and their
historic domination of women have been throughout history answered
by the Prophets by their assertion of God's greater power.
Baha'u'llah, in establishing the equality of men and women, continues
this assertion of God's greater power."
If anything going on from what you have just written, it would make
more sense to say, "(I)n establishing the equality of men and women,
makes this assertion of God's greater power not gender specific". This
would follow on from an earlier point you made about not symbollizing
God anthropomorphically.
"Much as in His great Glory He withdraws
glory from its historic association with warfare, retaining the idea of
glory for Himself, so He withdraws kingship and lordship from the
world, retaining the idea of sovereignty for Himself. The constitutional
monarc
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlMon Oct 30 18:43:14 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 20:46:03 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: from sonja - civil discourse
Re: civil discourse.
The places where I have found civil discourse within the Bahai
community and the feeling of community that it brings with it, have
been a number of years in the Dunedin Bahai community where there
was a sense of open discussion on the LSA in 1984. That was a special
year for me. And since then I was shattered by the lack of this
concerning Dialogue and the Service of women paper in 1988/9, but
since around a year now there has been Talisman, and because we are
able to practise civil discourse here, I for one, not only have learnt a lot
but have also the feeling that here is a Bahai community where I can
freely express my views. This is not to say anyone would agree with
them, but that is not the point. The point is that we can all do this here
and while it is fine to disagree with someone's viewpoint, to criticize
them for making it or to suggest that they should not speak or write to
various institutions as has been suggested to Juan, to my mind means
that that writer 1) doesn't know what it is like to be told that your
opinion is wrong, when it was sometimes even backed up by the
Writings, 2)doesn't really value diversity, 3) is more concerned with
image than with truth or an attempt towards a just society.
I think to have the feeling that one can express oneself if one chooses
to is necessary for our health, and for the health of any organization.
There is a lot of rhetoric in the Bahai Fiath. I am not saying this
generated by any institution or individual in particular but it exists.
It has dawned on me in the last few months that one of the reasons that
I romanticize about my days in Dunedin is that I felt a sense of spirit or
worship in either the Bahai or Maori community and here in Holland
meetings appear to be administration focussed. It struck me, too, in
reaction to much of what I have read on Talisman, that our Faith is
really lop-sided. There is such a lot of pressure on administration and
teaching, and the other parts of Bahai community life are
underdeveloped such as worship, culture (however this may be
expressed-but I mean having fun together).
I've been impatient and said things I've regretted, but I am more
dominated by a feeling of anger that I wasn't more assertive when an
issue was unjust. I regret all the times I did not walk out of an
assembly meeting here, and I have decided that I can not sit in silence
any more. But if there is an atmosphere of openness then these sorts of
feelings that I have just expressed would not be an issue, and nor would
I need to feel angry, because my voice, whether it was right or wrong
would be seen as part of everyone having a say, and then the group
decision would really be a group one.
While I appreciate the point that we should aim to word our grievances
and joys in a language sensitive to the cultures of those concerned, I
find it sad that so often, this is also used as an excuse to avoid an issue
or that the words written so obliquely that I get the feeling someone is
trying to trick me. At the same time I get sick of letters that imitate
Shoghi Effendi's 1930 English, when then it the norm to use words like
he or men when the meaning was humanity or to include women as
well.
Tone in language is important because it is what we pick up first, but it
shouldn't be used as an excuse to avoid any particular issue.
Tone in language is a thing of culture and if we only listen for tone,
then we'll only listen to the tones that homogenize with our own or
own our ideals.
Email has already revolutionalized my world. If I want to hear warm,
sincere and reassuring stories I can tune into Bahai Discuss or any or
the other discussion group where you have to be a card carrying Bahai
to subscribe, or I can tune into Talisman.
Thanks,
Sonja.
I feel I may have hit on something to bring out the nurturing in our
sons. They have the idea of being mama dogs and now each night, just
before going to bed they sit breastfeeding their various mongrel babies
while listening to music. I told them that the music helps with the
feeding.
From banani@ucla.eduMon Oct 30 18:49:38 1995
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 13:03:55 -0700
From: Amin Banani
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Juan's reforms
Dear Juan (sent to Talisman),
My heart sank when I read the vehemence with which you stated your points
on "reform" and your assessment of the Baha'i administration. Have you
reached the "end of your rope"? Since you have chosen to say these things
on Talisman, in particular, what do you expect as a response, or don't you
care? Love, Sheila
Sheila Banani
From banani@ucla.eduMon Oct 30 23:25:23 1995
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 12:02:44 -0700
From: Amin Banani
To: CMathenge@aol.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: MGilpatrick@usbnc.org, Derekmc@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: Marion Woodman
Dear Carmen and other Talismanians,
Yes, Marion Woodman (Toronto, Canada) is married to a Baha'i, Ross Woodman.
We are trying to arrange for both of them to teach at Bosch this year
(probably not during the summer). Wouldn't that be great? Her health has
not been very good, but if she is coming to teach at Esalen it might be
possible to have them both over at Bosch.
Love, Sheila
Sheila Banani
From banani@ucla.eduMon Oct 30 23:27:06 1995
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 11:46:05 -0700
From: Amin Banani
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: KKonline@aol.com
Subject: Decoder rings
Dear Talismanians,
I have requested my Decoder ring (capable of working in the 1990's) for
many months now from various members of this netgroup (Derek, are you
reading this?) and, in spite of my pleadings and threats to "expose" all of
you who have not YET expanded on your accepted "abstracts" which were
printed in the ABS Program Book for the conference (and posterity) which
should be submitted for consideration for publication in THE JOURNAL OF
BAHA'I STUDIES, to this day I remain without the means to "de-code" what
most of you are talking about. In case any of you think I am just joking,
you should know that I began my childhood in the era of radio, that is,
radio without television. WHERE IS MY DECODER RING?
Much love,
Sheila
Sheila Banani
From banani@ucla.eduMon Oct 30 23:27:54 1995
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 13:19:51 -0700
From: Amin Banani
To: "Joan L. Jensen" , talisman@indiana.edu,
JrCole@umich.edu
Subject: Juan's reforms
Okay, Juan--I guess we're all lucky that someone with a "cool" head, like
Joan Jensen, is on Talisman and was one of your first "respondents" to your
reforms post. Love, Sheila
>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
From banani@ucla.eduMon Oct 30 23:29:33 1995
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 14:17:51 -0700
From: Amin Banani
To: Ahang Rabbani , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: apologies
Dear Ahang,
What we "focus" on, I think, is the "unexpected" (your sexist comment). We
all know that you are a noted statistician--by the way, why don't you post
your research results? I certainly accept your apologies. Love, Sheila
>[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.
Sheila Banani
From banani@ucla.eduMon Oct 30 23:29:56 1995
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 14:10:11 -0700
From: Amin Banani
To: Don Peden , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Africa lives!
Dearest Bev and Don (Peden) and fellow Talismanians,
Since I have just returned this week to Talisman, after being "away" for
about 4 months, and finding the current "conversations" quite depressing, I
was seriously considering removing my name again from this list, until I
read Bev's wonderful message today. THANK YOU FOR BEING ALIVE IN THIS
WORLD, Bev. And, as an added thrill for me I learned that you are in
Kampala, a place dear to the heart of my family (Banani). I send you lots
of love, your sister, Sheila
>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.
Sheila Banani
From mcfarlane@upanet.uleth.caMon Oct 30 23:30:17 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 16:36:39 -0700
From: Gordon McFarlane
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: two types of catastrophe
Dear Friends:
Ahang wrote:
But I think it would be helpful to note that actually two types
of "calamity" or "catastrophes" are referred to in our writings.
Regarding the two types of of "calamities". It's my understanding
that Baha'u'llah has also distinguished between "irrevocable" and "impending
decrees". It is an irrevocable decree, for example, that every one of us
will eventually grow old and die. That we will die at an early age of
unnatural causes, is an impending decree, the likelihood of which is
increased or decreased by our own behavior and lifestyle.
The House of Justice says, repeatedly, "Whether future
accomplishments are to be reached after unimaginable horrors or embraced
through an act of consultative will, is the CHOICE before all who inhabit
the earth. I infer from this that "unimaginable horrors", a phrase which
sounds rather ominous and catastrophic, suggest an impending, rather than an
irrevocable decree.
If a doctor tells us that we must change our eating habits, our
lifestyle, get more exercise etc. or we'll die of coronary heart disease,
cancer, or some other nefarious ailment, it's not wise to assume that his
prognosis is an irrevocable decree and continue living as before. Nor
would the doctors predictions be the cause of the resultant afflictions with
wich we may be assailed. On the other hand, even if we do make the
prescribed changes but live in the expectation that we are going to get
sick anyway, chances are it'll happen.
Similarly, if we life in constant fear and anticipation of
catastrophe and calamity, we will no doubt percipitate one.
Shogi Effendi, in the last para of "Call to the Nations", reminds
us that "ours (is the duty), however confused the scene, however dismal the
present outlook, however circumscribed the resources we dispose of, to
labour serenely, confidently, and unremittingly, to lend our share of
assistance, in whichever way circumstances may enable us, to the operation
of the forces which, as marshalled and directed by Baha'u'llah' are leading
humanity out of the valley of misery and shame to the loftiest summits of
power and glory".
It's been my own experience that speculating on the the nature of
the multitude of impending calamities, unimaginable horrors and
limb-quaking catastrophes that might befall mankind, disrupts my serenity,
weakens my confidence, obscures my vision, saps my energy, diverts my
attention from the summit of glory to the valley of misery and shame and
quickly begins to transform me into a depressed, morose, immobile,
impotent pillar salt.
PLEASE NOTE - I am in no way implying that others who discuss this
subject on Talisman are depressed or depressing, morose, imobile, impotent
pillars of salt. I am refering exclusively to the effect that contemplation
of the subject has on me.
Sincerely
Gord.
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>Return-Path:
>Received: from roatan.ucs.indiana.edu by upanet.uleth.ca (MX V4.1 VAX) with
> SMTP; Mon, 30 Oct 1995 07:45:19 MST
>Received: (from daemon@localhost) by roatan.ucs.indiana.edu (8.7/8.7/1.10IUPO)
> id IAA29239 for talisman-outgoing; Mon, 30 Oct 1995 08:57:38 -0500
> (EST)
>Received: from gatekeeper.es.dupont.com (gatekeeper.es.dupont.com
> [192.26.233.2]) by roatan.ucs.indiana.edu (8.7/8.7/1.10IUPO) with
> SMTP id IAA15376 for ; Mon, 30 Oct 1995
> 08:57:31 -0500 (EST)
>Received: by gatekeeper.es.dupont.com; id AA28551; Mon, 30 Oct 95 08:57:01
-0500
>Received: by esds01.es.dupont.com; id AA15048; Mon, 30 Oct 95 08:56:54 -0500
>Received: from umc by esds01.es.dupont.com via MR/ESVAX with
> conversational-MRIF;Mon, 30 Oct 95 08:56:54 -0500
>Message-ID: <91847003015991/5710629@BMOA>
>
---
Gordon McFarlane e-mail: MCFARLANE@upanet.uleth.ca
Public Access Internet
The University of Lethbridge
From PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.eduMon Oct 30 23:30:30 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 14:29:06 PST8PDT
From: "Eric D. Pierce"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: apologies (Sheila's late messages)
Hi,
I got got this message on Monday October 30, 1995 at 2:28 in
the afternoon (California, USA). Is anyone else getting the
messages from Sheila's email server 2-3 days later than they
were sent?
There have been scattered reports of slow messages on other
parts of the internet, maybe the catastrophy will be when
email is wiped out due to a massive system failures? :)
Thanks,
EP
> Date sent: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 14:17:51 -0700
> To: "Ahang Rabbani" , talisman@indiana.edu
> From: banani@ucla.edu (Amin Banani)
> Subject: Re: apologies
> Dear Ahang,
...
>
> Sheila Banani
> 2320 Alta Avenue, Santa Monica, California 90402
> Tel (310) 394-5449
> Fax (310) 394-6167
> E-Mail: Banani@UCLA.Edu (Sheila)
>
>
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzMon Oct 30 23:30:57 1995
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 11:44:59 +1300 (NZDT)
From: Robert Johnston
To: LWALBRID@cluster.ucs.indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Found Anon, but...Tone[-e]
Dear Linda (& Sonja, I suppose),
You wrote:
This obsession with
>"tone" can really be a problem in allowing for expression of ideas.
Isn't it ironic that someone who wrote the word "ass" [as, like a donkey]
-- and called upon Bakhtin for validation -- should express reservations
about the tone of a certain letter? Maybe! But then ... maybe he was
instructed by the ensuing outrage and threats of talismanic extermination.
But if it is OK now to say anything one likes in whatever manner, maybe he
should write according to the rhythms and utterances of a South Taranaki
dairy farmer on a grim spring morning calling abuse to his wayward and
evil-eyed mongrel dog. Would that be OK? I mean that is his culture...
Would you like a sample, to test?
;-}
Robert.
From ahmada@acsusun.acsu.unsw.edu.auMon Oct 30 23:31:59 1995
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 11:49:58 +1100
From: Ahmad Aniss
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: reform
Dear Talismanians,
Dear Juan,
Sheila wrote:
>Dear Juan (sent to Talisman),
>
>My heart sank when I read the vehemence with which you stated your points
>on "reform" and your assessment of the Baha'i administration. Have you
>reached the "end of your rope"? Since you have chosen to say these things
>on Talisman, in particular, what do you expect as a response, or don't you
>care? Love, Sheila
>
>Sheila Banani
I say:
Me too!
To add, in your posting there were certain acquisitions and innuendoes that I can not
believe you can substantiate with any kind of proof. Reforming the administration to a
level where it has no resemblance to what was intended in the writings of our founders,
is not much less than indulging perversely to harm the Faith. However, there have
been enough postings showing falseness of your acquisitions. So, I rest it there.
With Love and Fellowship,
Ahmad.
_______________________________________________________________________
^ ^
^ Dr. A.M. Aniss, Tel: Home [61(2)] 505 509 ^
From KOLINSSM@hcl.chass.ncsu.eduMon Oct 30 23:32:31 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 20:06:53 EDT
From: Steven Kolins
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: fundamentalism
>
> 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?
>
Agreed. I am reminded of a few more contexts in which some kind of
conflict needed to be worked out in the Faith. My first association
was concerning Louis Greogry's support as a traveling teacher
associated with another Hand of the Cause's election ( of course
before he was a Hand) to the NSA and suddenly the NSA yanked support
of Mr. Gregory. The other thought was of Tahireh's unveiling at
Badasht with Quddus standing sword in hand.
Hmmmmmm.....
:)
Steven
All I need is Freedom of spirit, Chastity of soul, and Purity of
heart. A pov is not even secondary.
From jmenon@bcon.comMon Oct 30 23:33:42 1995
Date: 31 Oct 1995 02:01:51 GMT
From: Jonathan Menon
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Re: Reforms in Baha'i Administrations
Hi everyone,
I am a bit behind on reading my messages so I hope this reply isn't
redundant. Tony wrote:
"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."
I hope I don't offend anyone with the following comments, because I really am
interested only in the issues involved. Also, I am trying to get this done
quickly since the television coverage on the Quebec Referendum begins in five
minutes. I mean only to add to this discussion constructively with what I am
about to say.
I agree completely with Tony's point, but I think it brings to light an
interesting and complex problem, because the same thing can be said about the
Institutions of the Faith, which are not fully mature yet, and, like each of
us, are not yet able to express their guidance or make decisions which are
perfect (Universal House of Justice excepted). So, they receive criticism
because of it. I think the need to be tolerant of the imperfect style, tone
and content of the views of individuals is basically the same as the need for
us to be tolerant, kind and encouraging to the Institutions, even when
decisions they make might upset us. So often, we feel that we as individuals
should have our views tolerated and our criticism listened to while we find
it a bit difficult to extend that same courtesy to the Institutions of the
Faith. Since, to borrow Tony's very well-written phrase: we can all agree
(can we not?) that no Institution is ever going to do that perfectly (except
the UHJ), and that most will do it quite imperfectly.
Of course, this is a natural part of learning to build a new world order with
all the promises we have for it in Baha'u'llah's Writings. So, I think we
have to learn and grow together, realizing that we must be tolerant of each
other and that no one but the Universal House of Justice is going to be
perfect in their views or decisions. Just as we need encouragement to
develop, so do the Institutions, and this has to come from us, otherwise the
growth and maturity of the Institutions themselves will be stunted.
Yes, the Institutions should be tolerant of the views of the community, as
the Guardian writes. But it works both ways.
In terms of a venue for civil discourse (and now some of you might call me
naive, but there is nothing I can do about those views so, so be it) the
Baha'i community is supposed to have that in the institution of the Feast.
The reason some feasts maybe don't quite live up to this standard yet is tied
up with the points above--neither the friends nor the institutions have
attained a level of maturity where it can be accomplished. What it takes to
create this is for all of us to do our best to put the principles into
action, then, step by step, this forum for civil discourse will develop. In
addition to this, I remember a quote from the Guardian which states
(paraphrased): the Baha'i adminstration now is only the first step in what
will come in future to be considered the life and laws of community living.
So civil discourse is enshrined in the principles of the Baha'i community.
But we all have to focus our attention on living up to the principles of the
Faith if it is to develop properly.
Thanks, gotta go,
Jonathan
Hamilton, Canada
From eleka@leonis.nus.sgMon Oct 30 23:35:53 1995
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 09:32:41 +0800 (SST)
From: Anjam Khursheed
To: talisman
Subject: new member
Hello, I would like to subscribe to your network. I was given
your network address by One world publisher at Oxford, England.
I am a bahai living in Singapore (University lecturer),
and my name is Dr Anjam Khursheed. Please let me know the
prcedure for joining your network.
regards
Anjam
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduMon Oct 30 23:37:39 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 19:01:14 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Talisman
Subject: It's the law.
The following, taken from my recent law office experiences, are, to me,
absolute proof that (a) the Old World Order is rapidly collapsing and
(b) God, or somebody, has a weird and sometimes delicious sense of humor.
#1. From the US Dept. of Labor, Dallas, Texas
(First-Class letter from the Division Head)
Dear Mr. Poirier:
We cannot approve the Form ETA-9035 you recently submitted.
Federal Regulations 20 CFR 223.24(a)(c)(ii) require that you
submit TWO copies of Form ETA-9035; you only submitted one
copy. If you submit TWO COPIES OF FORM ETA-9035 your
application will be processed.
[n.b. from Brent: Form ETA-9035 is ONE PAGE LONG and as
a rule is submitted by fax! I re-sent the fax, this time
faxing the page twice and it was immediately approved.]
#2. (From the State Department of Taxation and Revenue)
Dear Mr. Poirier: Since you have incorporated your law practice,
you must now pay State Unemployment Tax.
Dear Department of Taxation and Revenue:
I am the sole shareholder, sole director, and sole employee.
Do you mean that I have to pay unemployment tax in case
I fire myself?
Dear Mr. Poirier:
It's the law.
3. (From a Judge in an adoption case I handled in another part
of the state some time back)
Dear Mr. Poirier:
I cannot issue the Decree of Adoption until the parental rights
of the natural father of the adoptee have been terminated.
Dear Judge:
The natural mother of the adoptee is a prostitute from Juarez,
Mexico. The natural father was one of her clients. The child is
now 12 years old. The natural father probably has never set foot
inside this country, and probably does not speak English. He surely
does not read the Legal Notices in the local paper. Please
advise.
Legal Notice published as a result of the Judge's decision:
[Published 4 times, one time per week, in the local paper]
To the unknown father of "A.B.", a child born in Mexico.
Mr. and Mrs. "L" have filed a petition to adopt your child.
Unless you file an Answer within 20 days of the last date of
publication, your parental rights may be terminated ....
#4. [From the Adoption Division of the Department of Children,
Youth and Families of the State of New Mexico, Santa Fe, NM]
Dear Mr. Poirier:
We cannot approve the recent adoption papers you have filed.
Dear Adoption Persons:
Why Not?
Dear Mr. Poirier:
Because the Social Worker Certification from the Department of
Children, Youth and Families was not included with your
paperwork. You must send us a photocopy of this certification.
Dear Department:
Where do I get this copy:
Dear Mr. Poirier:
From the Social Worker, of course.
Dear Department:
Where does the Social Worker get the certification?
Dear Mr. Poirier:
(Pause)
From us.
-----------
I've been out of touch for a couple of weeks. Not only with these
jollies, but I'm also connecting with the Dept. of Philosophy to re-work
my part-time Master's program to include some philosophy, theology, and
other fun stuff, and dropping most of the MBA coursework. So, I have over
1000 messages to wade through and I'll apologize now for my tardy comments.
Brent
From jjensen@welchlink.welch.jhu.eduMon Oct 30 23:38:38 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 21:02:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Joan Jensen
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: "styles in conflict"
Dear Talismanians,
As I read the various postings to Talisman, I am reminded again of two
different styles of communication that Deborah Tannen described in _You
Just Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation_. Although the
style she describes as being women's voice does not exclusively belong to
women, and visa versa, still reading about these different styles gives
me a better feeling about the postings that seem more critical or
confrontational in tone.
"It may seem at first that conflict is the opposite of rapport
and affiliation. Much of what has been written about women's
and men's styles claims that males are competitive and prone
to conflict whereas females are cooperative and given to
affiliation. Although it is true that many women are more
comfortable using language to express rapport whereas many
men are more comfortable using it for self-display, the
situation is really more complicated than than, because
self-display, when part of a mutual struggle, is also a kind
of bonding. And conflict may be valued as a way of
creating involvement with others.
To most women, conflict is a threat to connection, to be
avoided at all costs. Disputes are preferably settled
without direct confrontation. But to many men, conflict
is the necessary means by which status is negotiated, so it
is to be accepted and may even be sought, embraced, and
enjoyed....
Because their imaginations are not captured by ritualized combat
women are inclined to misinterpret and be puzzled by the
adversativeness of many men's ways of speaking and miss the
*ritual* nature of friendly aggression... (pp. 149-150)
There is much more, and whole chapter, and whole book. Reminding myself
of these differences makes it easier to follow 'Abdu'l-Baha's
twin admonitions:
"Let not your heart be offended with anyone."
and in the same passage.
"Beware! Beware! lest ye offend any heart"
(Promulgation of Universal Peace, P. 453)
It is also a joy and delight to participate in Bahai-Women-Converse,
which overflows with the gentle and strong words of support, assistance,
rapport, subtle humor but most of all love. I know it was created for
Baha'i women only, for now, and I think this is appropriate, because I
cannot imagine this level of love-in-discourse occurring in another
forum (that is, a forum that included men) at this stage in our
development. I hope that one day we will all become bilingual,
able to understand the language of the other gender, able to converse
in either language, and appreciate the different strengths each brings
without being misunderstood, offended, or offensive.
Peace,
Joan
----------------------------------------------------------
Joan Jensen
Baltimore, Maryland
From mfoster@tyrell.netMon Oct 30 23:39:22 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 19:57:29 -0600 (CST)
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Baha`i Administration
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Talismanians,
I wanted to say that I was quite surprised by the recent posting on
the subject of institutional problems. It stuck me as unneccesarily
confrontational. I also wonder about the meaning of equating Baha'i
institutional inerrancy (presumably of the Universal House of Justice)
with fundamentalism and about what seemed to me to be a reference to
a selfish intent among the House of Justice members in continuing the
practice of literature review.
I would think that most of us might agree that the infallibility of
the House is contextual. They are, like the beloved Guardian, not
omnipotent and make decisions on the basis of the information available
to them. However, I do not see how this condition alters the fact that
the decisions of the Universal House of Justice are under the infallible
protection of the Twin Manifestations. They are, after all, the channel
of God's Will on earth at this time.
Peter Khan is very dear to me. He was the auxiliary board member for
New York State when I lived there, and I got to meet him on a few
occasions. Yesterday, I read the text of his talk in Wilmette and was
impressed with his statement that, as he looks across the table at his
colleagues, he has come to realize that *they* are not the Universal
House of Justice - the members of the Supreme Institution, yes - but not
the House itself. To hear a sitting member of that body make such a
statement was quite moving to me.
IMHO, just like the resurrected (arisen) body of Christ was, in one
sense, the church, the Universal House of Justice is the resurrected
Temple (or body) of the Manifestation. As the Bab and Baha'u'llah
operated through Their physical bodies, or temples, when They were on
earth, These Holy Souls, inseparably connected with the condition of
Manifestation, function now through these nine men. To me, that is the
Universal House of Justice. It is God's appearance in the world - moving
among us and guiding us toward the time of global consummation.
Personally, I think that we need to be cautious of reductionism. The
House of Justice exists as a social reality sui generis (of its own
kind). It is not composed of personalities. These men are only the
instruments of God manifested. If I can be so presumptuous, the
responsibility of the "men of Baha" is to practice justice - to
independently investigate the reality of any situation presented to them
and to base their deliberations on the information they collect. It is
the synthesis - the decision - which is, within the context of available
data, guarded from error.
However, it is not our job, as I see it, to question the wisdom of
the Supreme Body. If we feel that we have a piece of information which
could be of help to the House, we can, in the spirit of servitude,
present it to them. However, we can then forget about it. We are free!
We no longer need to be concerned. It is in the hands of God.
Finally, to my way of thinking, unless scholarship serves the House
of Justice and its needs, it is *not* Baha'i scholarship. If we want to
know what *is* Baha'i scholarship, we need to study what the House, the
Guardian, etc. has said about it. What else is there?
Blessings,
Mark
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Sociologist of Religion *
___
* UniQWK #2141* Structuralists Know the Lingo ;-)
From 72110.2126@compuserve.comMon Oct 30 23:40:25 1995
Date: 30 Oct 95 21:47:21 EST
From: David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com>
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Baha'i Elections [1st of 3]
Dear Talismanians,
Requests for the following information have snowballed during the
past few days, so here it comes, for the delectation of all. I
will post it in three installments, as it covers three specific
areas: 1) membership on The North American Baha'i Temple Unity and
the pre-1924 US/Canada National Spiritual Assembly; 2) membership
on the US National Spiritual Assembly 1925-current; and 3) the
membership of the International Baha'i Council 1961-1963 coupled
with the membership of the Universal House of Justice 1963-current.
I will also post a list of those who have left the US NSA without
finishing a particular year, their reason for doing so, at least as
far as I know one, and their by-elected replacement. Any and all
corrections and additions will be highly appreciated.
I. Baha'i Temple Unity & pre-1924 National Spiritual Assembly
1909|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20|21|22|23|
------------------------------------------------------------------
Arthur Agnew |XX|XX|XX| | | | | | | | | | | | |
William Ashton | | | |XX|XX| | | | | | | | | | |
Zia Bagdadi | | | |XX| | | | | |XX|XX| |XX|XX| |
Louise Boyle | | | | | | | | | | | |XX|XX| | |
Ella Cooper | | | | | | |XX|XX| | | | | | | |
Frederick D'Evelyn | | | | | | | | | | |XX|XX| | | |
Helen Goodall |XX| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Louis Gregory | | | |XX| | | | | |XX| | | |XX|XX|
Albert Hall |XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX| | | | | | |
Joseph Hannen | |XX| | | | |XX|XX| | | | | | | |
Emogene Hoagg | | | | | | | | |XX|XX| | | | | |
William Hoar |XX|XX| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Horace Holley | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |XX|
Bernard Jacobsen |XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX| | | | | | | | | |
Allah Kalanar | | | | |XX| | | |XX| | | | | | |
Edward Kinney | | | | | |XX|XX|XX| | | | | | | |
George Latimer | | | | | | | | | | | | |XX| | |
Alfred Lunt | | | | |XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|
May Maxwell | | | | | | | | | |XX|XX|XX| | | |
Mountford Mills |XX|XX|XX|XX| |XX| | | | | |XX|XX|XX| |
Harlan Ober | | | | | | |XX|XX|XX|XX|XX| | | | |
Anna Parmerton |XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX| | | | | | | | | |
Agnes Parsons | | | | | | | | |XX| | | | | |XX|
William Ralston | | | | | |XX| | | | | | | | | |
William Randall | | | | | |XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|
Charles M. Remey |XX| |XX| | | | | | |XX|XX| |XX|XX|XX|
Corrinne True |XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|
Albert Vail | | | | | | |XX|XX| | | |XX| | | |
Roy Wilhelm | |XX|XX|XX|XX| | | |XX| |XX|XX|XX|XX|XX|
Percy Woodcock | | |XX| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Love,
David
From 72110.2126@compuserve.comMon Oct 30 23:43:35 1995
Date: 30 Oct 95 21:49:11 EST
From: David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com>
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Baha'i Elections [2nd of 3]
Dear Talismanians,
I supplied you the last chart in table form, but due to its length,
this one transmits better electronically if I compress it slightly
and simply cite years of service, inclusively, for each member.
Again, any additions and/or corrections humbly and wholeheartedly
welcome.
2. Membership: US National Spiritual Assembly, 1924-1995
Dwight Allen 66-74; 80-84
Elsie Austin 45-53
Dorothy Baker 37-53 Hand of the Cause 1951
Richard Betts 74-79
Ellsworth Blackwell 55; 58-60
Wilma Brady 81-85 CBC 1985
Mathew Bullock 52-53 Knight 1953
Magdalene Carney 71-82 CBC 1983
Hugh Chance 60-62 UHJ 1963
Ken Christain 46-53 Knight 1953
Amelia Collins 25-32; 38-43; 45-50 Hand of the Cause 1951
Juana Conrad 88-95
Arthur Dahl 58-68
William Davis 85-95
Alberta Deas 83-95
Tod Ewing 91-93
Nellie French 28-37
Soo Fouts 76-86
Amoz Gibson 60-62 UHJ 1963
Elizabeth Greenleaf 24
Louis Gregory 27-31; 39-45 Hand of the Cause 1951
Paul Haney 46-57 Hand of the Cause 1954
Lawrence Hautz 53-54
Robert Henderson 82-95
Horace Holley 24-60 Hand of the Cause 1951
Leroy Ioas 32-45; 49-51 Hand of the Cause 1951
Daniel Jordan 63-82
Borrah Kavelin 50-62 IBC 1961, UHJ 1963
Firuz Kazemzadeh 63-65; 68-95
Ali Kuli Khan 25-26
Chester Khan 82-88
Franklin Khan 69-81
George Latimer 33-38; 41-48
Charlotte Linfoot 53-75
Kevin Locke 88-91
Patricia Locke 93-95
Al Lunt 24; 27-36
May Maxwell 24: 27-28
William Maxwell, Jr. 74-76; 84-88
Florence Mayberry 59-60 CBC 1968
Jack McCants 69-70; 86-95
Margery McCormick 53-58
Allen McDaniel 25-45
Robert McLaughlin 53-57
Mountford Mills 24-26; 35-37
Glenford Mitchell 68-81 UHJ 1982
Florence Morton 24-27
Dorothy Nelson 69-95
James Nelson 77-95
Harlan Ober 38-40
Agnes Parsons 24
Sarah Pereira 60-73 CBC 1973
Paul Pettit 64-68
Robert Quigley 63-67
David Ruhe 60-67 UHJ 1968
Carl Scheffler 25-37
Siegfried Schopflocher 24-26; 29-34; 38-43 Hand of the Cause 1952
Mamie Seto 51-53
Velma Sherill 61-63 CBC 1973
Phillip Sprague 44-49
Edna True 46-68 CBC 1968
Katherine True 56-59
Allen Ward 82 (elected, never served)
Roy Wilhelm 24-45 Hand of the Cause 1951
Charles Wolcott 53-61 IBC 1961; UHJ 1963
The current US NSA has an average length of service, per member, of
15.11 years. Sixty-five people have been elected to the US NSA
since its inception.
This chart below indicates reasons for members who did not finish
a year's term, and names those who replaced departed members:
Year Original Member Why Bi-elected
------------------------------------------------------------
1945 Roy Wilhelm Illness Elsie Austin
1953 Elsie Austin Pioneer Lawrence Hautz
" Dorothy Baker Pioneer Charlotte Linfoot
" Mathew Bullock Pioneer Margery McCormick
" Ken Christain Pioneer Robert McLaughlin
" Mamie Seto Pioneer Charles Wolcott
1960 Ellsworth Blackwell Haifa Hugh Chance
" Horace Holley Haifa David Ruhe
" Florence Mayberry Haifa Sarah Periera
1961 Charles Wolcott IBC Velma Sherill
1974 Dwight Allen ? William Maxwell
1981 Glenford Mitchell UHJ Wilma Brady
1982 Daniel Jordan Murdered Allen Ward
1982 Allen Ward (election nullified by NSA) Robert Henderson
1984 Dwight Allen ? William Maxwell
1985 Wilma Brady CBC William Davis
1986 Soo Fouts ? Jack McCants
1988 William Maxwell CBC Kevin Locke
" Chester Khan ? Juana Conrad
1991 Kevin Locke ABM Tod Ewing
1993 Tod Ewing ABM Patricia Locke
Love,
David
From 72110.2126@compuserve.comMon Oct 30 23:45:02 1995
Date: 30 Oct 95 21:52:11 EST
From: David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com>
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Baha'i Elections [3rd of 3]
Dear Talismanians,
Below you will find post #3, which charts membership on the
International Baha'i Council and the Universal House of Justice
from 1961 and 1963, respectively, until the current date. Years in
parentheses indicate members whose election came at a bi-election,
either as the result of a death or a resignation. Total number of
voting NSAs are listed in brackets above the election year.
IBC UHJ
[56] [81] [113][123][133][132][165]
1961 '63 '68 '73 '78 '83 '88 '93
-------------------------------------------------------------
Farzam Arbab | | | | | | | | XX |
Hugh Chance | | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |
Hooper Dunbar | | | | | | | XX | XX |
Hushmand Fatheazam | | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX |
Amoz Gibson | | XX | XX | XX | XX | | | |
Lutfu'llah Hakim | XX | XX | | | | | | |
David Hofman | | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | | |
Sylvia Ioas | XX | | | | | | | |
Borrah Kavelin | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | | |
Peter Khan | | | | | |(87)| XX | |
Douglas Martin | | | | | | | | XX |
Glenford Mitchell | | | | |(82)| XX | XX | XX |
Mildred Mottahedeh | XX | | | | | | | |
Ali Nakhjavani | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX |
Ethel Revell | XX | | | | | | | |
Jessie Revell | XX | | | | | | | |
David Ruhe | | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |
Ian Semple | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX |
Adib Taherzadeh | | | | | | | XX | XX |
Charles Wolcott | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | | |
Sixteen men have served on the Universal House of Justice to date.
None have ever failed to return to office via the voting process.
The average length of service for the current UHJ membership is 16
years.
Love,
David
From burlb@bmi.netMon Oct 30 23:45:55 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 19:30 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: DEREK COCKSHUT
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Derek, Linda, and America's Medicated Destiny
Derek, after a rampant display of UK wit, suggested:
Do take the cigarette out of the
>coffee before you drink it please.
Burl says:
Why? A recent study of anti-depressents and anti-anxiety drugs and those
who use them (not a Rikki Lake program) found that being "sick" and having a
"condition" is very stressful and causes depression and anxiety. It was
also found that people who were on these medications were *not having any
fun* and were so stressed out over combating their illness that they were
making themselves miserable! So, guess what they "discovered"? Many (not
ALL) of these medicated folks did a complete turn around when (a) told that
they were ok, (b) taken off the meds, and (c) given coffee, cigarettes, and
chocolate!!! TRUE! (c) worked so well because they were "simple pleasures"
that the folks associated with relaxing and enjoying life -- and all three
have pharmacological components that were of benifit to the patient more so
than the meds! See...Woody Allen was right -- cigarettes are one of the best
things for you!
[one more reason to leave my camel in my coffee, Derek)
If you think I am making this up, see the feature story in Sunday's Oregonian.
[NOTE: This is *not* meant as an attack on psychiatrists, pharmacists, drug
dealers, or users -- follow the advice of your dr. and do not play games
with your meds)
I am thrilled that Linda ordered, as opposed to requested, my book. I love
taking orders from strong, assertive women who will put me in my place --
the bookshelf, after a through reading from cover to cover.
Some silly Baha'is in Oregon have convinced me to teach a five hour class on
the Destiny of America! HA! Those fools!
Can you imagine Baha'is so naive that they would trust me with 5 hours of
thier precious time? Now, they can trust me with two hours, the approx. time
to read MAN OVERBOARD (another subtle plug for my new book), but five hours
of me engaging them in a comprehensive interactive experiential event
regarding the Destiny of America is a bit much. Besides, everyone knows the
Destiny of America: relentless airplay on oldies stations.
As it doesn't take five hours to say "America: Teach it or Leave it", there
will be plenty of padding -- perhaps I will reconstruct the Obediance to
Authority experiments from the '60s. "Go ahead, give him 450 volts every
time he mispronounces Baha Allah...[note new Encyclopedia Britanica
spelling] I accept complete responsibility, you are only following orders.")
Burl (drove the Chevy to Levites but the Levites were gone) Barer
*******************************************************
Order MAN OVERBOARD, the new book by Burl Barer today!
*******************************************************
From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpMon Oct 30 23:46:29 1995
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 95 13:32:30 JST
From: "Stephen R. Friberg"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Please, no ganging up.
Dear Friends:
Many have expressed concerns over too critical messages, and I have been
among them.
But these too are criticisms, and now we must take care not to wound
any more.
Yes, I am extremely worried about tone. We need to support and
encourage acceptance of scholarly work like Chris's new book.
And we need to support Kalimat press. To do this, I believe,
we should exercise moderation and care to avoid needlessly
antagonizing people against Baha'i scholars and scholarship.
To me, this means avoiding an accusatory and inflamatory tone.
But, as Tony Lee and others have eloquently pointed out, in doing this
we should not silence voices that should be heard. Talisman is a
special place in part because we can voice our concerns and
criticisms. It has been structured to allow this!
Sometimes, maybe now is such a time, moderation and balance is
only achieved by offering our unconditioned love and support for
our esteemed Talismanian friends, especially those who challenge
us so much!
Yours sincerely,
Stephen R. Friberg
From carl@grapevine-sys.comMon Oct 30 23:47:14 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 23:38:51 -0600
From: Carl Hawse
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Spanking the Baha'is
>The Baha'is were told not to allow any trace of "the dust of despondency" to
>stain the heart of Shoghi Effendi. Trace? Gee, whiz! Read the Priceless
>Pearl where the author states in her diary something to the effect that "The
>Baha'is are killing Shoghi Effendi."
>
>It is because of direct violation of the Will and Testament of Abdul Baha
>that we have been/are being "punished" by the additional challange of these
>problems -- problems which have their solution in, I believe, essentially
>reversing the process :-).
I see two other ways of looking at it, based on maturiometry (ok, so I made
that up...):
1) The Guardianship became an inappropriate vehicle for advancing the cause
(hence was eliminated) because the Baha'i community was too immature to
receive the messages. (dRevelation/dt > dMaturity/dt). Hence, the
Community was popped back in the oven and the heat was turned up to increase
maturity (more crises! more crises!). Eventually the function of the
Guardianship will be filled some other way if the community still needs it.
2) The Guardianship became an inappropriate vehicle for advancing the cause
(hence was eliminated) because the Baha'i community was blessed with such
effulgent guidance (Shoghi Effendi worked overtime) that there was such a
great acceleration of the rate of maturation that a hereditary guardianship
was made obsolete in one Guardianship cycle. (dMarutity/dt)/dt > CriticalRate.
With this whole crisis/victory thing, it's hard to tell rewards from
punishments anyway. If it's tough to handle, it can be food for the soul.
What if we are being "rewarded" by the additional challenge of more problems?
Attributing any particular event to a specific act of divine will is a
dangerous step towards predestination, even if the act of divine will is a
reaction to a human-caused stimulus. There's an unknowable essence between
cause and effect which is impossible to psychoanalyze or outsmart. If we
could figure it out, it wouldn't be an act of god.
------------------------------------
Carl Hawse
carl@skipper.grapevine-sys.com
http://www.grapevine-sys.com/~carl
------------------------------------
From richs@microsoft.comTue Oct 31 00:14:16 1995
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 10:08:44 -0700
From: Rick Schaut
To: 'Talisman'
Subject: Justice and Baha'i Courts
Dearest Talizens,
Having acquired a bit more sleep since my last post, and having
given these issues more complete thought, I feel I'm in a
position to more completely state my position.
The argument in favor of the establishment of Baha'i courts can
be succinctly states as: there have been injustices, sometimes
grave injustices, in the past, and in order to reduce the
instances of these injustices we should institute Baha'i courts
which would handle those cases under which injustice is deemed
most likely to occur.
While I remain unconvinced that Shoghi Effendi's intent was to
implement Baha'i courts as an element of the Administrative Order
(it seems clear to me that Shoghi Effendi's intent was to
establish the institutions of the Faith as "courts" which would
perform the civil function of applying Baha'i Law in countries
where religious courts were the norm), this is not my primary
objection to this line of argument.
My primary objection to this line of reasoning is with the
premise as it has been stated and supported. What is required is
an objective standard by which we can determine whether or not
injustice has occurred and by which we might be assured that the
addition of Baha'i courts would be an improvement in these
circumstances. Lacking such an objective standard, this
evaluation is reduced to one of popular vote. (I can't imagine
the proponents of democracy would advocate an elitist, or
republican, form of governance.)
Now, one might ask, what's wrong with a popular vote on this
issue? Doesn't the quest for an objective standard negate the
God-given sense of justice each of us has? The answer to the
first is that the institutions of the Faith are not answerable to
the wants and desires of their constituents. This has been
stated by Shoghi Effendi in no uncertain terms. Moreover,
because consultation is the foundation of the Administrative
Order, as asserted by `Abdu'l-Baha Himself, the decision of an
institution is more than just the collective summation of the
subjective values of an institution's members. The answer to the
second question is that our God-given sense of justice suffices
to guide our own moral choices. It should not, however, be used
as standard by which to judge the decision of an institution.
Some other standard must be used.
I realize that this can give rise to the question of
dysfunctional consultation, but that question is really
of little help. Do we have any reason to believe the consultation
amongst the members of a Baha'i court would be any less
dysfunctional? No. As I believe I have demonstrated with my
response to Juan's hypothetical conundrum, you cannot measure
the absence or presence of the Evil One merely by someone's
recusal, or lack thereof, from discussion and decision on an
issue in which that person has an interest.
Rather than propose some objective standard for evaluating any
given decision of an institution, the proponents of the
establishment of Baha'i courts have presented hypothetical
circumstances which are unlikely, or were misunderstood, in light
of the principles of the Faith, and have stated personal
conclusions which, at their very heart, require a judgment of
someone else's motives based upon evidence which can be
adequately explained under a presumption of more pure motives
(or, worse, based upon evidence which should never have been
considered valid in the first place).
The unconscionable nature of this argument is made even more
evident by the fact that an objective standard based upon the
principles of the Faith has been proposed and has languished
unanswered and unused. No similar proposal has been offered in
its place, and no discussion of its merits has ensued. The
proponents of the establishment of Baha'i courts have persisted
in pressing their own, subjective, and, I might add, almost
completely undefined, standards by which they have judged the
decisions and motives of people for no evident reason other than
that these people happen to be in positions of authority in which
they did not ask to be and have made decisions which were not to
the liking of these proponents of Baha'i courts.
It has been suggested, or, at least, hinted, that the attitude I
have expressed in this line of reasoning amounts to blind
obedience to the institutions of the Faith. I think I might take
exception to this, particularly as it appears I'm being asked to
blindly follow the dictates of some individual's conscience, but
I think I shall only point out that obedience is not always
blind. I have a trust in the assurances of Baha'u'llah, `Abdu'l-
Baha, Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice, a trust
which is based as much upon my own experience as it is based upon
a reading of the Writings. This is no blind obedience. It is
certainly no more blind than one's obedience to the dictates of
one's physician.
And that, dear friends, lies at the very core of this entire
discussion. I can choose to dance to the tune of a few
disgruntled souls, or I can dance to the Tune which has resonated
in my heart since I was but a small child. And to those
disgruntled souls: if I could give you my heart, I would do so in
an instant. I know where you stand because I've stood there
myself. I now see it as a prison, but a unique prison; a prison
one can leave by simply letting go of its bars.
Warmest Regards,
Rick Schaut
From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comTue Oct 31 00:51:37 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 95 09:27:01 -0500
From: Ahang Rabbani
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Tablets of Baha'u'llah
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Dear Chris,
In your usually penetrating way you cut through the smoke and
write:
> In which issue of `Andalib was this report reprinted, pray
> tell?
I really don't know as I don't have some of issues of `Andalib
for the past couple of years, but recall that a number of months
ago, Juan mentioned that such a statistical statement was made in
Andalib. Perhaps either Juan or others can help here.
Also, if anyone has the text of the Archives brochure distributed
at the last International Convention, please share. Thank you.
> Considering that the bulk of Baha'u'llah's revelation is
> correspondence, do you or anyone on Talisman adhere to a *canon
> within canon* perspective on these writings, in which the more
> formally universal Tablets (Tarazat, Tajalliyat, Ishraqat,
> Bisharat, etc.) clearly have a much higher relative importance?
Based on God Passes By, clearly the Guardian thought there was a
definite hierarchy in the Writings of Baha'u'llah, for example,
he thought these 10 Works were on par with the Aqdas and
supplement its Text. I personally like the term you've coined:
canon within canon.
> Among Baha'u'llah's untranslated Tablets, which would you
> consider to be of comparable importance to the Tablets I've
> just mentioned?
I can't cite chapter and verse here at my office, but do recall
the House stating that major Works of Baha'u'llah which had
universal implications were all available now in English. (Was
it in Introduction to the Aqdas??)
> Finally, to the extent that Baha'u'llah is reiterative in His
> correspondence, what is the likelihood that anything *new* in
> terms of Baha'u'llah's teachings remains to be discovered? In
> other words, have Baha'u'llah's Writings been sufficiently
> represented in the translations we now have (such as the
> beloved Guardian's own selections in _Gleanings_)?
> Or are we in for some major surprises?
I think it depends on what one means by "teachings". If the
definition is matters related to the development of the
Administrative/World Orders and condition of the world, then
pretty much everything of import has been translated.
But, I think there is a world of "new" things yet to be
discovered in His untraslated Tablets and many major surprises
lies ahead. (As an example, weren't we a bit surprised when we
learned that Baha'u'llah ranked Quddus to be a Manifestation and
claims the He Himself is the spiritual return of Quddus? Here
is another one: Baha'u'llah says that Vahid-i Darabi is the very
essence of the Qur'anic and Bayanic Dispensations and is the
point round which these two Dispensations revolve. More on this
at the Austin ABS conf.)
By some estimates we have only less than 10% of Baha'u'llah's
Tablets translated into English, so obviously there is a wealth
of new things in these remaining 90% that remains to be
discovered. The typical comment that you hear in the community
is that, well, these other Tablets are personal correspondence
saying to the effect: "Thy gift of Persian rug arrived. May My
glory be upon thee." There is nothing further from the truth.
The importance of these remaining Tablets, while they may not
have that much in them for the administrative development of the
Faith, is in topical research. Again, as an example, if someone
is writing on Quddu