p23 Teaching to Capacity

The Master and Mrs. Boyle

By John Taylor; 2008 May 25, 09 `Azamat, 165 BE

 

Janet Khan has a fascinating history piece on Louise Boyle in the latest Journal of Baha'i Studies. Boyle was a Washington Baha'i who was immortalized in the following anecdote about the Master,

 

"During this time many people had been coming in and sitting down quietly. One of the ladies brought some flowers. Mrs. Boyle was arranging them in a vase, when Abdu'l-Baha said: "You are serving too much, Mrs. Boyle, you will get tired." Mrs. Boyle replied that it was a pleasure to be permitted to serve and that she wished Abdu'l-Baha's guests to see everything beautiful about him. Abdu'l-Baha said: `The guests are flowers themselves; they are the flowers of the rose garden of God; they will never wither; they will not disappear; they have perennial beauty and fragrance for evermore.'"  (SW, Vol. 5, p. 84)

 

Khan's article is about Boyle's later involvement with Maria Montessori, but I was intrigued by a brief mention of an article based on a question that Boyle asked Abdu'l-Baha about teaching to the seeker's particular capacity. Today we are very familiar with this word "capacity" from encounters with it in our Ruhi study circles, especially the tutors who take Book Seven. Here is what Khan's article has to say about how the article came into existence.

 

==========

 

"Initially unsure of her approach, on occasion, Boyle submitted her ideas in writing to Abdu'l-Baha. In one instance, Abdu'l-Baha read her notes, made a number of additions to the text, then returned the notes to Boyle, at the same time addressing to her a Tablet dated 1 April 1913, which conveyed His response. The Tablet reads,

 

"`The article which thou has written is very eloquent. It is an indication that through the Bestowal of His Holiness Baha'u'llah the power of composition is being developed in thee; thy pen is moving and thy tongue speaking. I have commanded to print and publish the article in the Star of the West that all the believers in the East and the West may read it." (Janet A. Khan, Research Note: Louise Dixon Boyle and Maria Montessori, Journal of Baha'i Studies 16, 1/4. 2006, p. 64)

 

==========

 

Let me see, "all the believers," does that mean ... like, you and me? Tantalizingly though, Khan only offers some brief quotations from Boyle's article. I could not stand for that. It is not even a grave departure from our topic of fundamentalism, because Boyle says at one point,

 

==========

 

"The perfect meeting of the demand with the supply, the need with its fulfilment is one of the fundamental laws of God."

 

So today let us devote our space on the Badi Blog to that article in its entirety, plus some supplementary material plowed up lately on capacity. For example there is this newly translated point by Baha'u'llah, indicating that our abilities are gifts of God, but that the bounty is given on a "use it or lose it" basis,

 

"O thou who art standing before My Throne and yet remain unaware thereof! Know thou that whoso seeketh to scale the summits of the divine mysteries must needs strive to the utmost of his power and capacity for his Faith, that the pathway of guidance may be made clear unto him." (Baha'u'llah, Gems of Divine Mysteries, p. 23)

 

==========

 

Then there is this advice from the Guardian:

 

==========

 

"Shoghi Effendi feels that he can lay down no rule as to when one should introduce the names of the Bab, Baha'u'llah, and 'Abdu'l-Baha in one's teaching. Much depends on the temperament and aptitude both of the teacher and the one taught ...

 "We must look to the example of the Master and follow our 'Inner Light,' adapting our message as best we can to the capacity and 'ripeness' of the one we are seeking to teach ...

 "Man's spiritual digestive powers have similar laws to those that govern physical digestion. When people are spiritually hungry and thirsty they must be given wholesome and suitable spiritual food, but if we give too much at a time or too rich food for the digestive powers, it only causes nausea and rejection or malassimilation." (From a letter dated 20 October 1925 written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, from The Individual and Teaching - Raising the Divine Call, #39, pp. 19-20)

 

==========

 

Meeting the Capacity of the Seeker

 

Star of the West, Vol. 4, pp. 70-71

by Louise Dixon Boyle

 

Abdu'l-Baha has repeatedly referred to the various human types as differing "like flowers in the rose garden of God." And in this day of unity and universal realization, we see clearly the necessity of recognizing the "fragrance" of all types and of according to each his opportunity of "diffusion or expression."

 

In giving the world this knowledge of the Day of God, no duty impresses itself so persistently upon the Baha'i as the necessity to meet the capacity of the seeker, and to realize among human beings a marked dissimilarity in approaching the teachings.

 

It will be only in the perspective of history that the full extent of religious decadence during the past few centuries will be realized. Around the significance of divinity there has accumulated a false atmosphere, due to our human association of it with the tangible. And it is inevitable, in the dawn of a new spiritual age, that many souls -- possibly destined for a particular activity in it -- should experience a reaction in turning from their old conceptions. It is this reaction, perhaps, rather than an essential incapacity or antagonism, which withholds many from a full acceptance of the Baha'i teachings. Such souls represent so large a proportion of the thinking people in the world today that it is impossible to confuse their spirit with that of the antichrist; although, undoubtedly, many of them in searching hither and thither for truth will permit the brief span of their lives to pass unsatisfied.

 

To assist all earnest inquirers to assimilate the teachings is the important privilege of Baha'is today. Surely it must be such as remain in the restricted environment of dogma and self who represent the element of opposition rather than they who have felt the vibrations afar off and cast away tradition in an effort to approach them.

 

It was with particular reference to questions asked by this type of inquirer, after the receipt of recent cablegrams from Abdu'l-Baha, that the following notes were submitted to Abdu'l Baha. In returning them with interpolations he has "commanded" that they be printed in the Star of the West.

 

=========

 

After the departure of the Bab the friends of God were in a state of utter confusion and bewilderment. A few who claimed to be the leaders of this scattered community fearing the loss of their lives, were hiding in remote and inaccessible villages, not daring to associate publicly with the people. The believers of God were like sheep without a shepherd; not one knew his duty." It was at such a time as this, in the extreme necessity for guidance and authority, that Baha'u'llah came forth and declared Himself to be the Promised Due. The perfect meeting of the demand with the supply, the need with its fulfillment is one of the fundamental laws of God.

 

Now in our day Abdu'l-Baha has said:

 

"The Cause has become very great. Many souls are entering it -- souls with different mentalities and range of understanding. Complex difficulties constantly rise before us. The administration of the Cause has become very difficult. Conflicting thoughts and theories attack the Cause from every side. Now consider to what extent the believers of God must become firm and soul-sacrificing Every one must become the essence of essences; each one must become a brilliant lamp. People all around the world are entering the Cause; people of various tribes and nations and religions and sects. It is most difficult to administer to such heterogeneous elements. Wisdom and divine insight are necessary.  Firmness and steadfastness are needed at such a crucial period of the Cause."

 

He has said repeatedly:

 

"Today the most important affair is firmness in the Covenant because firmness in the Covenant wards off differences.'

 

The finger of Abdu'l-Baha, like that of a great physician, is upon the pulse of all the spiritual conditions forming the Kingdom of God on earth. He knows far in advance of any outward demonstration just what error will manifest itself as a menace to the Cause and a test to the believers. He knows our hearts better than we know them ourselves because His insight is unerring in the spiritual realm. We live in the world and accept the guidance of God to but a feeble and limited degree. The heart of Abdu'l-Baha has always been turned to God and thus he has been the recipient of the holy confirmations since childhood, We know how these Holy ones possess in its fullness in this day that "universal divine mind" whose power is "conscious, not acquired."

 

Man's knowledge of God and His manifestation in human form is the most profound of subjects. We are capable of considering it only through the assistance of these Holy Educators, who have given the world all its ideals, all its spiritual vocabulary. So during his visit to America, in the full knowledge of conditions and with the utmost wisdom and insight, Abdu'l-Baha referred us to the proofs of his identity as the appointed Centre of the Covenant and the Greatest Branch, as a protection to us and to the Cause, -- not in revocation of his standard of servitude so gloriously upraised in the world -- in confirmation, rather than revocation of that most precious ensign of the Kingdom!

 

Since the presence of Abdu'l-Baha in our midst people are everywhere attracted to the teachings. It is most important that we should not make of this matter a dogma to offend. The self or ego is still so prominent in the human consciousness that the first inquiry of the groping soul for light is, "What does your leader claim for himself?" Abdu'l-Baha assumed the mantle of servitude to answer this very question. He stands in the midst of life today as an example, an embodiment of an ideal -- the relinquishment of self. For us, his chosen friends, not to contribute to that ideal is to retard human progress.

 

We must first teach the people about the Lord of the Covenant, who is His Holiness Baha'u'llah. When they become believers in the Lorn of the Covenant, then we must explain to them the Centre of the Covenant. We must say: He claims to be the Servant of God; he is the Centre of God's Covenant with man in this day. And as the spiritual perception of the inquirer expands in contact with the teachings the great station of Abdu'l-Baha will unfold to him.

 

In giving the teachings we must not mention the violators of the Covenant and thus render their acceptance difficult. In sharing this foreknowledge with the friends, Abdu'l-Baha has made us partners, as it were, with himself, has assumed that we are superior to evil suggestion, and that we will know how to use this knowledge most judiciously to protect the Cause.

 

Let us pray that we may so fully accept the Divine Guidance in every act of life that in the moment of test and difficulty we may stand as pillars of wisdom and strength in the Cause of God, firm in the Centre of the Covenant, and, like Abdu'l Baha himself, manifest toward all mankind the utmost tenderness, for only in this way may we lead them into the Kingdom.

p03 Babi foundations

Fundamentalism and the Bab

By John Taylor; 2008 May 24, 08 `Azamat, 165 BE

 

Today let us briefly examine the Bab's contribution to our understanding of what is now called fundamentalism.

 

Over the past several centuries, Islam, impotent in the face of change, confronted by Western culture and unable to regain its former ascendancy in science and technology, has responded by reverting to old ways and traditional answers. As we saw yesterday, the term "fundamentalism" was broadened in the late 1970's so as to describe the notorious radicalism and violence of Muslim radicals. Most countries in the Islamic world have had autonomous rule by Muslims for several decades; in spite of this, little progress has resulted. Unable to live up to their own ideals and expectations, leaders of thought in both Sunni and Shi'ih Islam resort to the plaintive rhetoric of victimization. Although Islamic history records the corruption of the faith very early on, followed soon after by an imperialist expansion unequaled in speed and territorial gain by any in history, including the conquest of the Americas; in spite of this, traditionalists yearn after an imagined early purity in Islamic civilization.

 

The just-released study of the works of the Bab, "Gate of the Heart; Understanding the Writings of the Bab," by Nader Saiedi, contends that the Mission of the Bab was designed primarily to cure this chronic wasting illness in the Faith from which He was the Mihdi, the One Who arose. The Bab redefined fundamentalism when He agreed with traditionalists that the key was a return to the creative spirit of the early Muslims.

 

"But this return to the source, as it unfolds in the Writings of the Bab, is the exact opposite of a return to the former rituals and practices. ... the creativity of the divine spirit involves not the preservation but the abrogation of the previous social laws and practices, and their periodic renewal in new forms." (p. 7)

 

The Bab, Saiedi points out, was concerned not with a wholesale rejection of either modernity or tradition but a thoughtful, critical re-examination of both.

 

"The Bab advocates adopting useful elements of Western modernity --for example, He encourages trade relations with the West, and urges learning from the sciences, arts and industries of the Christians (that is, Europeans). But he rejects the particularistic, materialistic, and morally harmful aspects of modernity that obstruct the progress of civilization." (Idem.)

 

The Bab in fact called for an intimate historical consciousness about spiritual teaching. He called upon Babis to have the utmost reverence for all our past origins, including that of past religions.

 

"This doth not mean, however, that one ought not to yield praise unto former Revelations. On no account is this acceptable, inasmuch as it behooveth man, upon reaching the age of nineteen, to render thanksgiving for the day of his conception as an embryo. For had the embryo not existed, how could he have reached his present state? Likewise had the religion taught by Adam not existed, this Faith would not have attained its present stage. Thus consider thou the development of God's Faith until the end that hath no end." (Selections, 89)

 

Just as the acceptance of evolution required careful documentation of the historical record of species variation by the likes of Darwin and Wallace, so the Bab called for a similarly scientific grasping after the meaning of past Faiths in order that the static received idea then known as the "perennial philosophy" might grow into what Baha'is now call progressive revelation. The latter would not have been possible without the Bab's groundbreaking disquisitions. But as with any ploughing operation, there had first to be much sifting and overturning of established doctrine.

 

"How vast the number of people who will, on the Day of Resurrection, regard themselves to be in the right, while they shall be accounted as false through the dispensation of Providence, inasmuch as they will shut themselves out as by a veil from Him Whom God shall make manifest and refuse to bow down in adoration before Him Who, as divinely ordained in the Book, is the Object of their creation." (Selections, 143)

 

In previous essays I suggested that instead of fundamentalism we use the word "false-fundamentalism" for reactionary movements in religion. This is because, as the parable of the house built on sand teaches, there really can be a good kind of foundation of fundamentals on which to build. Whatever religious activity comes out of the true fundamentals -- relationship with the God of love – has to be stable and good, like a firm foundation to a house. Whatever maintains this tie is a fundamental. The Bab was not reticent about exactly what this fundamental is,

 

"Thou hast asked concerning the fundamentals of religion and its ordinances: Know thou that first and foremost in religion is the knowledge of God. This attaineth its consummation in the recognition of His divine unity, which in turn reacheth its fulfilment in acclaiming that His hallowed and exalted Sanctuary, the Seat of His transcendent majesty, is sanctified from all attributes. And know thou that in this world of being the knowledge of God can never be attained save through the knowledge of Him Who is the Dayspring of divine Reality." (Selections, 115)

 

True fundamentalism, then, is the understanding that whatever I hold about God is not something I can put in my pocket. That would be presumptuous.

 

The relation is incomplete and requires humility, an intimate awareness that our conversation with Him is not yet over, that in our worldly life we are carrying it over into our relations with our fellow man. In His prayers, the Bab demonstrates the proper attitude. ".... I have been eager to worship Thee, yet have I failed to achieve Thy adoration, except by loving those who cherish Thy love." (Selections, 202) This bond between God and the Bab, further radiates out into the hearts of those who turn to them,

 

"Become as true brethren in the one and indivisible religion of God, free from distinction, for verily God desireth that your hearts should become mirrors unto your brethren in the Faith, so that ye find yourselves reflected in them, and they in you." (Selections, 56)

 

What property is worth more than this love? It is the most valuable jewel imaginable. Owning this invisible, ineffable jewel within the heart, it has to reflect out into the hearts of one's brothers and sisters in faith. Warmed by that feeling, it becomes impossible to regard anything, most of all the ties of religion, as a personal possession. Addressing the Shah, the Bab wrote,

 

"to possess anything of this world or of the next would, in My estimation, be tantamount to open blasphemy. For it ill beseemeth the believer in the unity of God to turn his gaze to aught else, much less to hold it in his possession. I know of a certainty that since I have God, the Ever-Living, the Adored One, I am the possessor of all things, visible and invisible..." (The Bab, Selections, p. 15)

p03 Baha'i Fundamentalism

By John Taylor; 2008 May 23, 07 `Azamat, 165 BE

 

As promised, we will start into fundamentalism today. Yesterday I happened to be in the library just as they were finishing the processing of a new audio book, "Battle for God," Karen Ferguson's recent book about fundamentalism in her Big Three Conference of world faiths. Until I have audited this book, therefore, I will avoid talking about fundamentalism in other faiths and confine myself to the fundamentals of what I already know something about, the Baha'i Teachings.

 

In my Internet research I was startled to read in the Wikipedia the following definition of religious fundamentalism:

 

"a `deep and totalistic commitment' to a belief in the infallibility and inerrancy of a holy book, absolute religious authority, and strict adherence to a set of basic principles (fundamentals), away from doctrinal compromises with modern social and political life."

 

Why is that startling? It actually was not until the second or third reading, when I suddenly realized that this definition more or less applies to what any committed Baha'i holds about the Baha'i faith and the covenant. It is true that there are important relativistic and liberal aspects of Baha'i "authority" that this leaves out, but strictly speaking this describes our core belief. So, are we fundamentalists?

 

Answering that question is difficult because, as I just found out, this is a relatively new word in the English language. It was applied to certain sects of Christianity, but did not enter the Oxford English Dictionary until the 1950's. And then it did not have any generally applicable meaning until, according to Wikipedia, the Iranian Revolution and the American hostage crisis required that commentators somehow explain to American audiences what was going on in the heads of the Iranian Mullahs.

 

"Fundamentalism" therefore could not have been mentioned by any of the Central Figures, and indeed the first use of it that I found by the House was in the 1980's. They wrote the NSA of the USA about a book with a negative article about Baha'i (a later edition of which is now ensconced in our Dunnville Library) called, "A Guide to Cults and New Religions", by John Boykin, advising them,

 

"Given the rise in most parts of the world of religious bigotry and fundamentalism, it may be timely for your National Assembly to try to arm the Baha'is against such attacks as appear in this book, which is so typical of the approach of Christian churches. Sooner or later, as you know, these churches will rise against the Cause. You are therefore requested to consider asking a qualified person or group of persons to prepare suitable materials, perhaps for a booklet, which the friends may use in dealing with misrepresentations of the Baha'i Teachings by Christians." (18 October 1984, in Compilation of Compilations vol. I, #296, p. 151)

 

The next reference did not come until almost a decade later when the House warned Baha'is against taking the writings too literally, lest there be a split based upon some being perceived as "Baha'i fundamentalists." Here is what they wrote,

 

"The House of Justice recognizes that, at the other extreme, there are Baha'is who, imbued by what they conceive to be loyalty to Baha'u'llah, cling to blind acceptance of what they understand to be a statement of the Sacred Text. This shortcoming demonstrates an equally serious failure to grasp the profundity of the Baha'i principle of the harmony of faith and reason. The danger of such an attitude is that it exalts personal understanding of some part of the Revelation over the whole, leads to illogical and internally inconsistent applications of the Sacred Text, and provides fuel to those who would mistakenly characterize loyalty to the Covenant as `fundamentalism'". (Universal House of Justice, 1992 Dec 10, Issues Related to Study Compilation)

 

Also in the Holy Year, the House addressed the Baha'i world, saying that the increased political freedom from the fall of communism had kicked up a dirty cloud, as it were, of nationalism and racism. These were compounded by,

 

"an upsurge in religious fundamentalism which is poisoning the wells of tolerance. Terrorism is rife. Widespread uncertainty about the condition of the economy indicates a deep disorder in the management of the material affairs of the planet, a condition which can only exacerbate the sense of frustration and futility affecting the political realm. The worsening state of the environment and of the health of huge populations is a source of alarm." (Ridvan 1992 message written by the Universal House of Justice to the Baha'is of the world)

 

In a later Ridvan message, the House also warned that fundamentalism is a symptom of a deeper spiritual disease,

 

"This spiritual hunger is characterized by a restlessness, by a swelling dissatisfaction with the moral state of society; it is also evident in the upsurge of fundamentalism among various religious sects, and in the multiplication of new movements posing as religions or aspiring to take the place of religion." (Universal House of Justice, Ridvan 155, 1998, p. 4)

 

Now the fact that "fundamentalism" does not turn up in the Writings of the Central Figures does not mean that "fundamental" does not. There is a rich vein of valuable material there, enough to fill several essays in the future. Clearly although there are strong fundaments (the Latin word refers to the foundation of a building, and any building has to have some grounding, even one built on sand) in the Baha'i system, all of the negative aspects of fundamentalism are excluded by the explicit law of Baha'u'llah.

 

"The people of Baha should soar high above the peoples of the world. In matters of religion every form of fanaticism, hatred, dissension and strife is strictly forbidden." (Tabernacle 2.35)

 

This is a recent translation that might well have used the new word "fundamentalism," but did not. However it does use the even broader word "fanaticism;" so there need be no worries in spite of certain similarities to fundamentalism in other religions that the negative aspects of fundamentalism are not protected against in Baha'i law. The Revelation tears apart but also puts together the best of what was there before. Let us then end with this prayer for today:

 

"I testify that no sooner had the First Word proceeded, through the potency of Thy will and purpose, out of His mouth, and the First Call gone forth from His lips than the whole creation was revolutionized, and all that are in the heavens and all that are on earth were stirred to the depths. Through that Word the realities of all created things were shaken, were divided, separated, scattered, combined and reunited, disclosing, in both the contingent world and the heavenly kingdom, entities of a new creation, and revealing, in the unseen realms, the signs and tokens of Thy unity and oneness." (Baha'u'llah, Prayers and Meditations, CLXXVIII, p. 295)

p03 Arrowhead

Arrowhead of an Awakening

By John Taylor; 2008 May 22, 06 `Azamat, 165 BE

 

This month we have been asking how to get rid of religious fanaticism.

 

Recently, in a brief summary of the Baha'i stand against fanaticism, we pointed out that the entire faith is designed to splice this blight permanently out of the moral genes of the human race.

 

We cited three main sources for this enterprise.

 

The first was Abdu'l-Baha's Secret of Divine Civilization the first foundational Baha'i document for the implementation of this goal. Written to those compatriots who would reform perhaps the most fanatical country in history, 19th Century Persia, this book points out that one of the fundamental instructions of the Muslim religion, enshrined in the Qu'ran, is a divine injunction to deal with those of opposing beliefs in terms that can only be described as meek and mild,

 

"See for example the divine words that were addressed to Muhammad, the Ark of Salvation, the Luminous Countenance and Lord of Men, bidding Him to be gentle with the people and long-suffering: `Debate with them in the kindliest manner.' (Q16:126) That Blessed Tree Whose light was `neither of the East nor of the West' (Q24:35) and Who cast over all the peoples of the earth the sheltering shade of a measureless grace, showed forth infinite kindness and forbearance in His dealings with every one. In these words, likewise, were Moses and Aaron commanded to challenge Pharaoh, Lord of the Stakes: `Speak ye to him with gentle speech.'" (Q20:46) (Secret, 52)

 

In the light of current events, this makes it starkly clear how profound is the betrayal of their own religious ideals by the dogmatists of Shi'ih Islam. Baha'u'llah, in His last major work, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, addressed at length the root causes of this egregiously un-humanitarian attitude on the part of the religious leaders of Persia.

 

"O Hadi! The blind fanaticism of former times hath withheld the hapless creatures from the Straight Path. Meditate on the Shi'ih sect. ... It is now necessary to reflect a while, that haply that which hath come between the True One and His creatures may be discovered, and the deeds which have been the cause of protest and denial be made known." (Baha'u'llah, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 163)

 

In effect, He states, a faith founded on protest against the martyrdom of Husayn had embroiled itself in the same politicized hatred, immorality, envy and greed that caused his martyrdom in the first place. In the 1920's Shoghi Effendi described the consequent impotence of the religious and secular leadership of the land his ancestors to address the challenges of modernism,

 

"Persia, the cradle of an unfolding world civilization, is still bereft of her freedom, sunk in ignorance, a prey to contending policies and factions, beset on one hand by the powers of orthodoxy and sectarian fanaticism and assailed on the other by the forces of materialism and unbelief." (Shoghi Effendi, Baha'i Administration, pp. 88-89)

 

The Muslim sectaries to whom Abdu'l-Baha and Baha'u'llah addressed their appeals have, since the Iranian Revolution, given up completely on dialog with rival faiths. They have openly adopted terror, including cleansing Iran of its Baha'is, as their chief way of proselytizing their faith and vindicating the validity of their worldview.

 

At the same time, relations among other faith groups, while less overtly violent, are far from what they should be if religion is ever to become a positive force for cohesion in the face of the pressing challenges presented by climate destabilization.

 

The second foundational document specifically addressing fanaticism is a letter the Universal House of Justice wrote to the leaders of religion in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September, 2001. This was a historic appeal not just for love and cooperation among disparate faiths, but a specific proposal for following Baha'u'llah's injunction to extirpate fanaticism root and branch.

 

The House opens this letter by pointing out that while prejudice used to seem inherent to human nature, the legacy of the 20th Century is to break up the logjam obstructing our progress. Unfortunately, faith groups are hardly at the cutting edge of the breakup.

 

"Tragically, organized religion, whose very reason for being entails service to the cause of brotherhood and peace, behaves all too frequently as one of the most formidable obstacles in the path; to cite a particular painful fact, it has long lent its credibility to fanaticism. We feel a responsibility, as the governing council of one of the world religions, to urge earnest consideration of the challenge this poses for religious leadership."

 

The House then summarizes events of the past century, both tragic and hopeful, that push religion into prominence. This is a problem that will not go away by itself. There is a "reluctant recognition that there is no credible replacement for religious belief as a force capable of generating self-discipline and restoring commitment to moral behaviour." There has been a spread of general knowledge about world religions and an increase in interfaith worship, but there remains a lack of,

 

"both intellectual coherence and spiritual commitment. In contrast to the processes of unification that are transforming the rest of humanity's social relationships, the suggestion that all of the world's great religions are equally valid in nature and origin is stubbornly resisted by entrenched patterns of sectarian thought."

 

The House points out that racism and sexism, or to put it positively, a lack of recognition that there is but one human race, is at the heart of the failure of believers of different races to recognize the validity of one another's religious heritage. They do not downplay the evils and dangers of interfaith tension. History, they point out, teaches a frightening lesson of what can happen.

 

"The consequences, in terms of human well-being, have been ruinous. It is surely unnecessary to cite in detail the horrors being visited upon hapless populations today by outbursts of fanaticism that shame the name of religion. Nor is the phenomenon a recent one. To take only one of many examples, Europe's sixteenth century wars of religion cost that continent the lives of some thirty percent of its entire population. One must wonder what has been the longer term harvest of the seeds planted in popular consciousness by the blind forces of sectarian dogmatism that inspired such conflicts. (The Universal House of Justice, 2002 April, To the World's Religious Leaders, para 12, p. 4)

 

The third foundational document was "One Common Faith," commissioned and published a few years later by the House to expand upon the themes it had broached in the letter to leaders of religion. Here they explore the scriptural justifications for interfaith harmony. The intention of the book is to empower Baha'is to redouble our efforts to quench the fires of fanaticism and dissension. In the forward they write,

 

"Far from feeling unsupported in their efforts to respond, Baha'is will come increasingly to appreciate that the Cause they serve represents the arrowhead of an awakening taking place among people everywhere, regardless of religious background and indeed among many with no religious leaning."

 

There is evidence that this arrowhead is penetrating deeper. Yesterday we noted with pleasure on this blog the proposal put forward this past March in a large public forum by a major Christian intellectual for a "charter of compassion" based upon the Golden Rule." She suggests that this be devised and posted by the leaders of the three largest and most influential religions. Although she is distancing herself from the Baha'is who initiated this in the first place (not to mention a similar Golden Rule initiative in the 1940's by the likes of Albert Schweitzer and Norman Rockwell) one cannot help but be pleased that, in spite of the reluctance of the world's leading lights, there seems no other way forward than to expose and dry up the roots of religious dogma. It is not quite the same as cutting and composting, as Shoghi Effendi suggests be done here, but it is better than nothing.

 

"The call of Baha'u'llah is primarily directed against all forms of provincialism, all insularities and prejudices. If long-cherished ideals and time-honored institutions, if certain social assumptions and religious formulae have ceased to promote the welfare of the generality of mankind, if they no longer minister to the needs of a continually evolving humanity, let them be swept away and relegated to the limbo of obsolescent and forgotten doctrines. Why should these, in a world subject to the immutable law of change and decay, be exempt from the deterioration that must needs overtake every human institution? For legal standards, political and economic theories are solely designed to safeguard the interests of humanity as a whole, and not humanity to be crucified for the preservation of the integrity of any particular law or doctrine." (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 42)

 

Next time the plan is to delve into fundamentalism.

p03 book and two videos

Tolstoy, Armstrong and Bronowski on Religious Fanaticism

By John Taylor; 2008 May 21, 05 `Azamat, 165 BE

 

 

Our theme inspired by master Baha'i speaker Joe Woods is religious fanaticism. I have been reading Leo Tolstoy's Confession, which deepened my interest even more.

 

Tolstoy, Confession, Translated by David Patterson, Norton, New York, 1996

 

I suppose when found it during a browse in our local library I was attracted by this, written on the back cover of the paperback: "In 1879 the fifty-one-year-old author of War and Peace and Anna Karenina came to believe that he had accomplished nothing and that his life was meaningless." Hmm, thinks I. That is my age right now, and when it comes to the uselessness of one's contribution, I have Tolstoy beat hands down; an unpublished blogger with nothing to show for thirty years of research and writing. Yet Tolstoy was driven into a spiritual crisis by a feeling of worthlessness.

 

The book does not disappoint, I must say.

 

Tolstoy is the greatest novelist, I realized, for one reason and one reason only: he was the most self-critical novelist, a seeker of truth who realized that the truth lies within, in one's moral condition. Want to find God? Make yourself worthy by criticizing yourself mercilessly, and acting on it. Tolstoy went from atheist to believer, very much like I did at age seventeen, and he explains every step of his way with wonderful insight in this book. I would recommend Confession to anybody going through this particular valley of search.

 

Here is an example of what Tolstoy has to say about religious fanaticism. He is talking about after he had found God, after he had taken the bit in his teeth and begun associating with other Russian Orthodox believers and trying to swallow the beliefs of this church. He then began associating with believers of other denominations of Christianity.

 

"As a result of my interest in faith at the time, I became acquainted with believers of various creeds: Catholics, Protestants, Old Believers, Molokans, and others. And I met many people among them of the highest moral character who were truly believers. I wanted to be a brother to these people. But what happened?

"The doctrine that had promised me a union with all through love and a single faith was the very doctrine that, in the mouths of its finest adherents, told me that these people were living in a lie, that the thing that gave them the strength to live was a temptation of the devil, and that we alone are in possession of the only truth possible.

"And I saw that the members of the Orthodox Church regarded as heretics everyone who did not profess the same beliefs as they, just as the Catholics and others viewed the members of the Orthodox Church as heretics; I saw that although she tried to hide it, the Orthodox Church regarded as enemies everyone who did not adopt the same outward symbols and expressions of faith as she.

"And it had to be this way because, first of all, the assertion that you live in a lie while I live in the truth is the most cruel thing one person can say to another, and, secondly, because a man who loves his children and his brothers cannot but regard as enemies those who want to convert his children and his brothers to a false faith. And this enmity grows in proportion to one's knowledge of the teachings and doctrine. Even I, who had supposed that the truth lay in a union of love, was forced to recognize that the teachings of doctrine destroy the very thing they set out to produce." (Tolstoy, Confession, pp. 85-86)

 

You will no doubt be hearing more from me about Tolstoy's Confession, although most of it falls under the category of proofs of deity rather than eliminating religious prejudice. But before taking a step further I want to refer all (or perhaps I should say both of) my readers to a current event that may turn out to be a major, historical step forward in the elimination of religious fanaticism. This is Karen Armstrong's suggestion for a "Charter of Compassion" which she says should be drafted and posted in places of worship by theologians of the big three religions for her, Christianity, Judaism and Islam. I have put it on the blog at:

 

<http://badiblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/karen-armstrong-charter-for-compassion.html>

"People want to be religious, says scholar Karen Armstrong; we should act to help make religion a force for harmony. She asks the TED community to help her build a Charter for Compassion -- to help restore the Golden Rule as the central global religious (theme)."

 

She is consciously excluding all the other faiths, so do not get your hopes up for Baha'i participation. Interestingly, she parrots Tolstoy's insight when she says in this video, "Religious doctrines are meant to be summons to action, you only understand them when you put them into practice." In any case, this is a big step in the right direction, however limited it may be from a Baha'i point of view. Here is the link on the TED website: Charter for Compassion; Karen Armstrong: 2008 TED Prize wish: http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/234

 

There is a second video posted on the blog last night called, "The Greatest Moment in Television, Ever."

 

<http://badiblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/greatest-moment-in-television-ever.html>

 

Of all the years I spent on a sofa in front of the plug-in drug, these two minutes from Jacob Bronowski's series on the history of science, "The Ascent of Man," is by far the finest. Bronowski explains the inevitable result of religious fanaticism in the most affecting manner possible. I was thrilled to find it on YouTube, for I have often written often about it. It is still hard to watch it without a thrill running down my spine. Since I would have seen this around the time I was investigating God, this probably guided my way to faith. In any case, I consider Jacob Bronowski to be my scientific father. If you cannot get it off my blog, here is the link on YouTube.

 

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mIfatdNqBA>

The Greatest Moment in Television, Ever

Karen Armstrong A Charter for Compassion

Reviews of Debaters and Consent

The Great Debaters and Age of Consent

By John Taylor; 2008 May 20, 04 `Azamat, 165 BE

 

Last night I watched the new DVD "The Great Debaters," with Denzel Washington and Forest Whitaker. I was inspired along with the average viewer by the underdog-wins-out theme of a tiny Black college's debating team beating a famous White school, but beyond that I found the way the film was researched intriguing as well. This is depicted in the "DVD extras" section where they show how in a formal setting the filmmakers and actors filmed interviews with the aged original participants in the debates, their teachers and, when they had died, their descendants. This historical research suggested how not only films but also the debate itself might be improved and updated to meet the needs of a world threatened by climate destabilization. I will come back to this in a later essay.

 

I just finished what I think is one of the most important, thought provoking and possibly revolutionary books to come out this century, George Monbiot's "The Age of Consent, A Manifesto for a New World Order." On the back cover is the motto: "Everything has been globalized except for consent." Age of Consent is a lesser known, earlier work than Monbiot's bestseller on global warming, "Heat," but I think the former has to be his masterpiece. It deserves to become a classic of political science.

 

Age of Consent is modeled on Marx's Communist Manifesto, which Monbiot dismisses by saying that in spite of its appeal for justice for the oppressed working man, it is too simplistic. He points out that even today one cannot read Marx's Manifesto without wanting to go out and shoot a bourgeois capitalist exploiter or two. Monbiot does an excellent job throughout the book of improving on Marx by dealing with complex issues with clear logic and commonsense. He is a popularizer of political science, but most of all he treats it as it should be treated, as a revolutionary steppingstone for the imagination.

 

Still, in spite of starting off by abjuring Marx's violently oppositional orientation, Monbiot does not entirely escape it. He holds to the assumption that the rich are determined permanently to exploit the poor while stifling all hope of our collective survival. Unlike Abdu'-Baha, he does not see the super-rich coming to their senses and voluntarily agreeing to legal limits to extremes of wealth. He does acknowledge at the end of the book that at least two of their most important agents have "turned," George Soros and Joseph Stiglitz, and that the steep increase in executive salaries may be a sign that this "age of coercion" is entering a final stage of moral bankruptcy.

 

Unlike lesser minds, Monbiot recognizes that the only way out of this mess is to establish a democratic world government. The heart of the book is a specific and I must say startlingly bold proposal for bringing this about. Leading up to this, the book opens with a truly brilliant dismissal of the rivals to democracy, which are anarchy (his own former leaning) and communism. Unlike academic theorizers, he usually speaks from his own travels and direct experience in the countries he uses as models.

 

For example, he rejects anarchy as a prospective way of ordering the world by pointing to an experience he had in the anarchic Darfur region of Africa. An entire clan was wiped out by another bearing guns in the middle of the night. As long as a violent few have access to weapons (and not necessarily modern ones; Rwanda showed that sticks and machetes can effectively exterminate imagined opponents in their millions), anarchy is not a viable option. Several other telling examples from Africa cited by Monbiot seem to indicated that just as that continent has the richest human gene pool, it also is a unique laboratory and showpiece of what works and what does not in political structures.

 

Monbiot's startling proposal comes in Chapter Four, "We the Peoples, Electing a World Parliament." His proposal is not to wait around for national governments to agree among themselves to sponsor a world government, why not just start a global election process going without them? Elect a democratic body of 600 members based on representation by population. Since there are about six billion people in the world, that works out to be a constituency of ten million people for each of the 600 representatives. I have to admit, I never thought of that.

 

The Baha'i proposal is for a representative to come out of the nation state; he or she would initially at least be appointed based on qualities that satisfy all levels of state government. These appointees would travel to a universal gathering of man where they would form a world constituent assembly. But now that I think of it, there is no reason that a world democratic election might not be held either before or after that "universal gathering of man." Monbiot sees the world parliament working independently and concurrently with present international bodies.

 

At least in the beginning the democratic world parliament could exercise no official force of law. Their resolutions would not be law, as in a normal parliament, but instead would work by prestige. They could right wrongs, he holds, by the pure moral force of being the chosen representatives of the peoples of the world. It might work too, as long as national governments and corporations do not oppose it, either openly or through their usual dirty tricks. Monbiot seems to think they could operate in the face of active opposition by plutocrats, capitalists and nationalists, but I have my doubts.

 

In any case, he makes an elaborate argument for this democratic institution that I should not try to summarize. Suffice to say that everyone who aspires to be a world citizen should read and digest this proposal. As Monbiot himself says, it may be deemed flawed and might need an overhaul, but something like this has to be done, and done soon, if we are going to have any future generations of human beings to inherit this languishing planet.

P39 Broken Sticks

2008 May 19, 03 `Azamat, 165 BE

 

For those who receive my work as it comes out by email, please note that yesterday's essay "Relativity of Absolutism" was total bilge water -- I have heavily revised it. Since I cannot unsend essays already sent, replace what you got with the presentable version on the Badi' blog at:

 

<http://badiblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/p03-relativity-of-absolutism.html>

 

Most Canadian believers will have been notified of the following on the Canadian Baha'i Website:

 

CANADIAN BOOK ON BAHA'U'LLAH RECEIVING POSITIVE RESPONSE IN CHAPTERS BOOKSTORES

"Responding to increasing interest in books about spiritual issues, Chapters bookstores in Ottawa and Vancouver have been stocking Canadian author Shahrokh Monjazeb's new book on the Prophet-Founder of the Baha'i Faith, "Baha'u'llah." Eight Chapters stores in these two cities now have copies of the book, with a number of additional stores expected to add it to their shelves soon. Read the full story on the Canadian Baha'i News Service:"

<http://bahainews.ca/en/010508bahaullahbook>

 

The official body is not so crass as to suggest this, so let me: on your next trip to Chapters, buy a copy for yourself, your local Baha'i and non-Baha'i library, and for your friends and neighbors. As a regular customer of Chapters, I certainly plan to do that next time I stop by. What is more, many libraries discard books as soon as the copyright is more than ten years old, so a new publication like this one has a much better chance of staying on the shelves than if you donated, say, Gloria Faizi's classic introduction.

 

My thanks to the Baha'i Views blog for pointing out this excellent study by Moojan Momen of the varying levels of apostasy in, or rather out of the Faith. It is good to know that scholars have terms for the different kinds of disaffection after people leave. I would have thought it was like divorces, a range from amicable to bitter separations.

 

<http://www.northill.demon.co.uk/relstud/apostasy.html>

 

A day or so ago an article appeared in the Ottawa Citizen by Baha'i essayist Jack McLean. It is part of their "Ask the Religion Experts" series, and the question they had for Jack was,

"Do you think Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty is right to ban the Lord's Prayer from the beginning of the legislature each day? Should there be a moment of silence so everyone can say the prayers of their own faith instead?"

<http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/religion/story.html?id=bfd06571-96a1-4eb8-8e98-7d75f5a6f159>

I am glad they asked Jack. Though usually I am overflowing with opinions, I personally cannot think of anything better than "I have no opinion" to that question.

 

A while ago I realized that I was forgetting my morning prayer and reading sometimes, so I signed onto one of those "Baha'i reading a day" services. It does the job, though it is annoying because it does not include the sources. Over several days they sent the following meta-quotes about the daily reading itself, all new translations from Baha'u'llah, in the Deepening Compilation, Compilation of Compilations vol. I, Nos. 363-365, p. 188

 

“Gather ye together with the utmost joy and fellowship and recite the verses revealed by the merciful Lord. By so doing the doors to true knowledge will be opened to your inner beings, and ye will then feel your souls endowed with steadfastness and your hearts filled with radiant joy."

"Peruse ye every day the verses revealed by God. Blessed is the man who reciteth them and reflecteth upon them. He truly is of them with whom it shall be well."

"Peruse My verses with joy and radiance. Verily they will attract you unto God and will enable you to detach yourselves from aught else save Him. Thus have ye been admonished in God's Holy Writ and in this resplendent Tablet."

 

I had no idea how important it is not just to read, but to read with joy. It is especially hard for me in the morning, because I have to make others make time. I drain myself browbeating a sullen wife and kids into slowing down to read and pray. It is never easy or painless. It is not, as I had hoped, getting easier as the kids get older. By the time I have the flock gathered around, it is very hard for me to avoid reading with gritted teeth, much less reading with joy and radiance. But that is what God wants, so that is how it will have to be. As Francis Bacon said, though with considerably less divine authority,

 

"Choose the life that is most useful, and habit will make it the most agreeable."