| home |  |
translations | |
meditations | |
expulsion | |
about Alison | |
Meditations
Talisman messages of April to December 2002
Date: Wed Apr 3, 2002 9:14 amSubject: Re: [talisman9] Evolution and Science
Dear Tony,
Thanks for your simple explanation of terms. I am not up on any of this and so don't comment. But one thing you said got me thinking. You commented that Abdul-Baha insists on there being a divine purpose for creation. And it got me thinking that the thing about the divine purpose is that it *transcends* creation. It exists in what is often referred to as "pre-existence". From this point of view, everything that happens already has and always was intended to. Baha'u'llah captures this idea, for example, in the Mathnavi where, in lines 147-155, he is discussing the Day of "Am I not", the day in pre-existence when we were brought into being and the covenant was created. In the poem, one gnostic says, oh yes, he can remember that day, but another gnostic, who had greater insight, says "that day of God has never ended nor has fallen short, we're living in that day!". My point is that God's purpose for man, from the point of view of pre-existence, has always existed. But within the world of creation, it has not always been manifest. The mistake is to think that the divine will must be manifest in creation at all times.
Alison
Date: Fri Apr 5, 2002 8:52 am
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Re: meaning of infallibility
>So, we can be caught-up in the natural "play" unfolding before us, or in the
>mystery of God's "Reality". To me, such is the nature of "free will."
I don't know what your name is, but I agree with your analysis 100 percent. I think you are exactly right. When it comes right down to it, that is the guts of free will. There is no real freedom except in detachment from the world. Freedom within the world is constrained by the world and is therefore only a limited freedom.
Alison
Date: Mon Apr 8, 2002 11:38 am
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Evolution and Science
ME:
>>My point is that God's purpose for man, from the point of view of
>>pre-existence, has always existed. But within the world of
>>creation, it has not always been manifest. The mistake
>is to think that the divine will must be manifest in creation at
>>all times.
YOU:
>Unless you're suggesting the manifestation of the Divine Will, as "God's
>purpose for man," requires the existence of someone capable of understanding
>it. As in, the sound does not exist because there was nobody around to hear
>the tree fall, or the requirement of a "cause and effect" relationship to
>exist between God and His creation. However, this would require a
>distinction of "God's purpose for man" and other aspects of the Divine Will,
>which could not exist, IMO.
Yes, I was meaning the divine will as God's purpose for man. As I understood Tony's explanation, the idea of parallel evolution requires that man and apes always be different in some physical way, and have therefore evolved in a parallel fashion. It was never the case that man was an ape.
I was suggesting that one can hold to God's purpose for man, as Abdu'l-Baha does, and not feel a need to hold to parallel evolution. God can have a spiritual purpose for man, and man can once have been an ape. While man is an ape, God's purpose for man as a spiritual being is not manifest in the form man took at the time, except I guess to the degree of having physical faculties. This doesn't mean one has to deny the spiritual destiny of man. God's will exists in pre-existence and is always true. It just means that that spiritual destiny did not manifest in the world until later, when man and apes came to evolve differently.
For example, a sperm cannot write essays. It's gotta join up with an egg and go through many different forms and experiences before it does that. Science will tell you its a sperm and not a human being. But the divine will may manifest in it and, in time, it will write essays. From the point of view of pre-existence it was always willed to write essays.
Other sperms, even though they got to join up with eggs, they didn't end up writing essays. They were the gorillas. :-)
Alison
Date: Tue Jun 11, 2002 7:47 pm
Subject: Re: Historical Baha'u'llah
Dear silentspirit9,
You say that you want to get to know the human Baha'u'llah. Your message made me think of a letter of Baha'u'llah that Juan Cole translated and posted on the academic list H-Baha'i a while ago. I post it below. I also include Juan's comments about the letter, at the end.
I love the letter because it reveals a very touching part of the human Baha'u'llah. He is fascinated by the new animals he sees in the new place he has travelled to. He is also uncertain about his future. And he complains about the bitter cold.
I noted your comment in your message about how Baha'is loved Baha'u'llah. I thought it was interesting because my experience of Baha'is is that they seldom speak about Baha'u'llah. They are more interested in discussing and studying what the House of Justice says. Certainly around these parts Baha'is do not study Baha'u'llah and speak about him rarely. I don't think he is a person they think much about. And if you listen to the exhortations that come from on high in the Baha'i administration, the emphasis is on reading Shoghi Effendi. An example of how well Baha'is read Baha'u'llah is the fact that Peter Khan said in a speech in 2000 that Baha'u'llah said the House was infallible. Baha'u'llah never said that.
Alison
--------
To: H-BAHAI@H...
Rosen, p. 126, no. 37:
Baha'u'llah, Istanbul, fall, 1863.
He is the mighty, the everlasting.
It is well known that the wayfarers unto God, after passing the way
stations of what is other than he, arrived at the renowned place known as
Istanbul. So far, nothing has been seen from its inhabitants but
conventional, officious formalities. What will come next? What decree
will fate inscribe behind the veil? But, we saw many barren trees and much
frozen snow. Every moment the heat dissipates and the cold increases. The
salamander of fire has been heard of, which depends on fire for its
existence, by the grace of the all-knowing, the all-wise. But a snow
salamander has never been seen. Now, by the wonders of God's handiwork,
many snow animals have been observed. After than, what will the white hand
of divine power and the illumined hand of the all-praised bring forth?
All are held in his grasp, and depend on his will. No God is there but he,
the mighty, the eternal. Nothing else has happened. That is, there are no
discussions. After our consultations, details will be sent. All will be
comfortable in their quarters until the time comes. That time is in the
hands of God, the mighty, the beloved. We make mention of all of the
friends, and counsel all to avoid neglecting the mention of God, nor should
they allow their love of him to be veiled by the love of anything
else. Peace be among those who follow the truth.
--------
Remarks: It is interesting that Baha'u'llah depicts the journey from
Baghdad to Istanbul not just as a physical one, but as a form of mystical
wayfaring unto God. His criticism of Ottoman high culture as overly
concerned with formalities echoes what he also said in the Tablet to the
Kings. His humanity is demonstrated in touching ways here, as with his
anxiety about the future, which remains unknown to him and his suffering
with the unfamiliar, wintry autumn of Anatolia. I speculate that he saw
for the first time white animals against the snow, perhaps dogs. For a man
from lush, green, warm Mazandaran, who had just spent a decade in sultry
Baghdad, this sight was apparently quite striking. He playfully contrasts
Iranian myths of the salamander of fire with the Turkish reality of snow
animals.
Baha'u'llah was clearly looking forward to some sort of consultations with
Ottoman officials, having been brought to the capital. He was unaware that
the decision had long ago been made to exile him to Edirne, and that his
stop in Istanbul was a mere formality from the point of view of the
sultan's officials.
----
cheers Juan Cole
Dear Warren,
Baha'u'llah talks about fearing God and loving God, but I think he argues
that we should be motivated by love when it comes right down to it: "Walk in
my statutes for love of me and deny thyself that which thou desirest if thou
seekest my pleasure." And again the Aqdas: "Observe my commandments for the
love of my beauty". But I agree with you that fear of God is wisdom. I know
that fear of God inclines me to pull my head in when I can feel it bending
out of shape.
The "everyone is a revolution" idea is my distillation of some of the Arabic
Hidden Words. What I hear Baha'u'llah repeatedly saying is that God lives
inside us. "My love is in thee, know it, that thou mayest find me near unto
thee." "Thou art my lamp and my light is in thee. Get thou from it thy
radiance and seek none other than me." "Turn thy sight unto thyself that
thou mayest find me standing within thee, mighty powerful and
self-subsisting." "Thou art my dominion... thou art my light... thou art my
glory... thou art my robe..." "Thy hearing is my hearing, hear thou
therewith. Thy sight is my sight, do thou see therewith, that in thine
inmost soul thou mayest testify unto my exalted sanctity, and I within
myself may bear witness unto an exalted station for thee."
On the basis that God is standing inside us, mighty, powerful and
self-subsisting, I conclude that we are each a revolution. I think people
assume that in order to have power or to make a difference in the world, you
have to have worldly power of some sort; for example, be on an assembly. But
I think the Hidden Words argue against this. They argue that we are all
potentially very powerful in ourselves because, hey, God the all powerful
lives inside us. In order to be powerful, then, our primary task is to
unlock what's inside us, not go running around tyring to gain worldly power
and/or influence. Much can be done at home in quiet moments.
"Justice is, in this day, bewailing its plight, and Equity groaneth beneath
the yoke of oppression. The thick clouds of tyranny have darkened the face
of the earth, and enveloped its peoples. Through the movement of Our Pen of
glory We have, at the bidding of the omnipotent Ordainer, breathed a new
life into every human frame, and instilled into every word a fresh potency.
All created things proclaim the evidences of this world-wide regeneration.
This is the most great, the most joyful tidings imparted by the Pen of this
wronged One to mankind. Wherefore fear ye, O My well-beloved ones? Who is
it that can dismay you? A touch of moisture sufficeth to dissolve the
hardened clay out of which this perverse generation is molded. The mere act
of your gathering together is enough to scatter the forces of these vain and
worthless people." (Baha'u'llah: Gleanings, Pages: 92-93)
It makes me think about the Mashriq I attend weekly with my friends. I think
it is impossible for us to imagine the spiritual influence that our meetings
are having. It is deceptive. Seemingly all we do is turn up and listen to
Baha'u'llah's amazing words and to lovely music and get thoroughly carried
away. And this is having an effect on the world? Hey, can't be, where's the
toil and sweat? The "work" is in the discipline of attending regularly and
in focussing on Baha'u'llah and not letting the world get in the way. In
this way, I believe we can all discover our revolutionary power.
I looked at the web site you mentioned, by the way. I thought the peace
prayers from all the religions were very powerful.
Alison
Gee, Larry, an easy question? :-)
I don't know what will happen with the administrative order in the
foreseeable future. It may well get worse before it gets better, but I think
it will get better over the long term. The fundamentalism we see today will
disappear. I think it is important to bear in mind that the fortunes of the
AO are in the hands of God. I was talking to Steve yesterday about the
Watergate scandal. I was reminded of it because here in NZ, every time there
is scandal in govt, it's called X-gate. Watergate proves that small, chance
events can lead to huge change. The AO may one day come face to face with
its Watergate. When that happens, no matter how much it may think it has
things sewn up, the situation will prove that God is the only one who has
things sewn up.
You seem to be asking how does one get out of a seemingly impossible
situation. I can only tell you what I do. It probably sounds trite, but I
turn to Baha'u'llah. And I sincerely believe that this is what the community
must do. It's got to do that anyway, whatever situation it finds itself in.
Scriptural basis for this?
"O MOVING FORM OF DUST! I desire communion with thee, but thou wouldst put
no trust in Me. The sword of thy rebellion hath felled the tree of thy
hope. At all times I am near unto thee, but thou art ever far from Me..."
(Persian Hidden Words, No 21)
I have been deeply influenced by the idea that my rebellion has felled my
hope. This quote springs to mind every time I feel as though there is no
hope. Immediately, I realise that I have forgotten to ask Baha'u'llah for
help. And then I am reminded of Abdu'l-Baha's words and I know that the
situation only looks hopeless from my limited perspective. God, however, can
do anything, so there is no such thing as never having hope and an answer:
"22. O thou who art turning thy face towards God! Close thine eyes to all
things else, and open them to the realm of the All-Glorious. Ask whatsoever
thou wishest of Him alone; seek whatsoever thou seekest from Him alone. With
a look He granteth a hundred thousand hopes, with a glance He healeth a
hundred thousand incurable ills, with a nod He layeth balm on every wound,
with a glimpse He freeth the hearts from the shackles of grief. He doeth as
He doeth, and what recourse have we? He carrieth out His Will, He ordaineth
what He pleaseth. Then better for thee to bow down thy head in submission,
and put thy trust in the All-Merciful Lord." Abdu'l-Baha: Selections, p: 51)
Yes, you're right that the community places too much emphasis on
administration and not enough on developing spirituality. In light of what I
have said above, I think the believers should create their own
Mashriqu'l-Adhkars. The misunderstanding common in the community is that a
Mashriq is a building, like the one in Wilmette. But the writings give us a
number of definitions. First of all, the Mashriq is the heart of the
believer. The Mashriq is also a devotional meeting. This is the kind of
Mashriq I attend weekly and that any group of Baha'is can start up. In Terry
Culhane's book "I beheld a Maiden" (Kalimat Press), Terry points out that
the Aqdas prescribes the House of Justice in K30 and the House of Worship in
the very next passage (K31). They are *both* vital to the community.
Instead, we have Houses of Justice everywhere, and these are based on a very
weak devotional community life.
Another interesting thing is what Baha'u'llah says in K149 about the
covenant. "Recite ye the verses of God every morn and eventide. Whoso
faileth to recite them hath not been faithful to the covenant of God and His
Testament". How often have we heard Baha'is go on about obedience to the
covenant being obedience to the House, and never mentioning the central
importance of this verse? They put the concept of the covenant into an
administration mould and never imagine it to have a devotional dimension.
Finally, my feeling is that the only way to avoid the dogmas you speak of is
to focus on Baha'u'llah to the exclusion of all else. If we focus on a thing
in the world to save us (such as the House) to the exclusion of God, we end
up shackled by dogma. Only Baha'u'llah can transcend that.
Alison
Dear all,
Jim, I thought your message was really great.
You defined the issue as:
>As far as terrorism is concerned, I would define the issue as what,
>if anything, any of us can do about the wars between the world's game
>masters.
This issue is important to me too. Perhaps I was ignorant before 9/11 but
after it, it seemed that the world headed wholesale towards war. When Bush
went into Afghanistan, I was sure WW3 was upon us. That turned out not to be
the case. I have done some reading since then and realise that the Muslim
world isn't united enough to present that kind of united front against US or
Western aggression. But now Bush is planning to attack Iraq! and I am
wondering if this nightmare is ever going to end with a single person alive
on the planet. I am worried that the world is heading into a decade or
decades of real gloom. I look back on the way the world was during the last
world wars and think about how bleak things were then. Up until now, I have
always imagined that that sort of thing was over and would never happen
again. But now I think differently.
In line with your answer no 1, I thought, well, where are the Baha'is when
you need them? Baha'u'llah is the answer, so where is he and what are the
Baha'is up to? Are they doing their job? When I surveyed the community, I
saw a community of people whose consciences and minds have been trampled by
blind obedience to the House and an oppressive fundamentalism. What a
tragedy. The world is headed for war and the Baha'is are lost in their vain
imaginings. Great. In addition, as I understand it, the Baha'is has been
counselled not to discuss these issues because that is involving oneself in
politics.
As I see it, then, the way forward is to work to free the Baha'is. For me,
this is the primary objective. This is in line with my belief that it is
Baha'u'llah's message that the world needs and it is only Baha'is who can
teach it. Therefore the most effective way to get it out there is to free
the teaching instruments. I think the only way to free the Baha'is is
through prayer, example and education. As I have already said in a previous
message to Larry, when you feel like there is no hope, turn to Baha'u'llah.
I found an excellent quote for that yesterday: "The healer of all thine ills
is remembrance of me. Forget it not". Second, Baha'u'llah argues that we
should render him victorious using a goodly character:
"It behoveth the people of Baha to render the Lord victorious through the
power of their utterance and to admonish the people by their goodly deeds
and character, inasmuch as deeds exert greater influence than words."
(Tablets, p 57) "In this day the hosts that can ensure the victory of the
Cause are those of goodly conduct and saintly character." (Tablets, p 88)
As for education, this is where Talisman comes in. In this forum, we can
educate ourselves in what the Baha'i principles and teachings tell us and
how they apply to the situation we find ourselves in. Also, education will
free the Baha'is from the bondage of fundamenatalism. We can also deal with
the issue of what not getting involved in politics actually means. For it
doesn't mean that we should keep our mouths shut when the whole earth is
about to go sky high. Also, practising the skills of consultation here helps
us in other areas of life. For example, I have learned here how to voice my
opinion openly and to argue constructively and to hold my own against those
who disagree. Talisman produces role models, which are key to learning. I
learned most of my skills from watching Juan in the early years.
Anyone listening in who is interested in developing their confidence in
speaking out, please do so. This is the place to learn. Baha'is are supposed
to be family, although we often make an awful job of being such.
I think I'll stop there with this line of thinking.
Jim, I'll get back to you in response to your practical suggestions.
Alison
>However, this COULD explain the behavior of some of the current AO
Tery, I think you've got it right here. What seems to happen is that "truth"
becomes identified with the organisation and stops being the thing that
lives inside yourself. When truth is the same as the organisation, it
becomes a simple case of endless obedience - my organisation, right or wrong.
Steve and I have just watched a doco about the period in English history
where the king was forced to relinquish power to parliament. Before this
power was relinquished, there was a civil war between those who supported
the king (they argued: my king, right or wrong) and those who supported
parliament - ie a constitutional monarchy (we don't mind having a king, but
he doesn't tell us what's right and wrong).
It's amazing how the very same issue raises its head over and over
throughout history. The Baha'is face this exact same issue today. Should
they support the House, right or wrong, or hold that each individual has the
right to determine for themselves what's true - and thereby effectively
limit the power of the House.
History is against the 'House, right or wrong' position.
Alison
I was reading the following message on the UU list for discussion of the
Palestinian/Israeli war. It reminded me of Abdu'l-Baha's comments on war and
I thought I'd share it here. I particularly liked the fact that this woman,
having experienced Middle East conflicts from all sides, had come to the
conclusion that all humans want the same basic things. I felt that she saw
the situation from the point of view of the oneness of humanity, like
Abdu'l-Baha does:
> How amazing the effort of vain imaginings when truth has
I also liked her conclusion about abandoning hate. There is so much emphasis
in the writings about abandoning hate - seeing all as a reflection of God
and not creating 'enemies' in our minds by demonising others.
I argue that seeing another person or persons as all-powerful evil doers is
an example of joining partners with God. Because of the power you give to
that person or persons, they become god-like.
Alison
Larry,
Yes, I agree with you that God is not dead, but rather cannot be identified
as a thing. I think that's what Baha'u'llah means when he stresses that God
transcends creation.
I was reading the Ibn al-Arabi Society's newsletter and there is a quote in
there that bears on this issue. Ibn al-Arabi argues, as I understand him
anyway, that in order to know God we need to recognise him in the world.
Although God himself is not in the world, his signs, or names and
attributes, are and when we interact with those, we learn about God. This is
particularly the case with a person we love. The relationship we have with
those we love teaches us much about God. Ibn Arabi would say that we see an
image of God in that person.
Now, getting to your point. Baha'u'llah says that when we get up close to
the ones we love, we find inevitably that they let us down. He says that the
world is like a vapour in the desert which the thirsty dreameth to be water,
but it is in fact a mirage. And it is the same with the people we love, they
inevitably let us down or we wonder what we saw in them and so on. The fact
is though, that we did once see God in them. So what went wrong? We are
created to love, but then Baha'u'llah himself tells us that it will always
go horribly wrong. (This is also true of our belief in a religion, just to
have its leaders turn bad.)
Ibn Arabi says: "the one who stays with the image is lost, and the one who
rises from the image to the reality is rightly guided". By "image" he means
the image of the beloved person or thing. Initially, we think that God is
actually in the thing itself. But Ibn Arabi is saying that we must come to
realise that God is not actually in the thing - all along, the thing has
only ever been an image that has brought us closer to reality. We have to
let the thing go and look beyond it to the higher reality it signifies.
A concrete example would be where people have a string of spouses in the
hope that one day they will hit on the right one. Because the world is an
illusion and inevitably a let-down, such people will never find the perfect
partner. They believe that God is located in the person, and don't realise
that what they see is an image of God teaching them who God is.
Another example is the Baha'is, who are convinced that God resides in the
name Baha'. If they could just look beyond the name and see the transcendent
reality that the name Baha' signifies, they would let go of their
fundamentalism.
Alison
Larry,
> I don't think that we are let down by the ones we love
I disagree. I think we are let down by others all the time. I believe I have
been let down by the Baha'i administration, for example. People do abandon
us, abuse us, and so forth. Look at the way things are for many in the
poorer countries. I think there can be no doubt that people let each other
down all the time. There is a young boy of 14 here in NZ who has just been
found guilty of murder. Just about everyone in his life that ever meant
anything to him let him down.
I think accepting that we are let down is a part of accepting reality.
"Sorrow not if things contrary to your wishes have been ordained..." I think
Baha'u'llah is referring to the natural process we all go through of coming
to terms with imperfections in others and the world.
>only that we are let
But I agree with you here, that when faced with disappointments, we have to
reconceptualise the situation. This was the point I was making. We can get
lost in things like hatred, rebellion, bitterness, apathy and so on. This is
would be the attachment you refer to. Or we can keep our eye on our
God-image and realise that it is a transcendent reality that is only
reflected in others. This forces us to detach from the worldly things in our
life.
I suppose I have been very influenced by Baha'u'llah's approving quotation
of this verse:
"Live free of love, for its very peace is anguish
Alison
I was thinking some more about the idea that a person can be a Baha'i while
not being a member of the Baha'i community. I think this idea has the
potential for greatly increasing our success at teaching the Faith. If we
were able to lighten up over community membership and see Baha'u'llah and
his teachings as a universal that everyone, no matter what their religious
persuasion, might be interested in, then we'd be able to spread the
teachings around more.
I began thinking about this when I was reading the Ibn Arabi Society
newsletter (see passage below). People who join the Ibn Arabi Society are
people of all faiths who are interested in Ibn Arabi's teachings. I think
the Baha'is would do better if they took this sort of open, universal
approach, rather than limiting themselves to steering people into community
membership. Perhaps if the community could embrace more categories of
person, like believers who are members, believers who are not members,
people who agree with the Baha'i social teachings, people who follow Baha'i
spiritual guidance, those who study the Baha'i Faith because they are
interested in religion, and so forth.
Baha'u'llah had things to say about many aspects of life, if, in teaching,
we just put it all out there and let people decide for themselves what their
interaction with the teachings were, then I think people would warm to the
Baha'i Faith much more. The Baha'i community could be the place where those
who want to formally join can sign up. I think it's tragic that the Baha'is
can only think up one category, and as good as consider everyone else an
infidel.
Alison
----------
(Remember that Ibn Arabi's thought is basic to the concepts used by
Baha'u'llah. And look at the interest in him! - Alison)
Interview with Prof James Morris, in Ibn Arabi Society newsletter, Summer
2002, Issue 18 pp21-22
JM: But maybe we could talk about audiences now - who wants to know about
Ibn Arabi, who is seeking him out. Looking at the Islamic world, one could
identify a key audience to be Muslims living in the West. In places like
Exeter University or any major university in the Western World,
increasingly, people who are coming to study Islamic Studies are Muslims
trying to figure out what Islam means in a variety of new cultural settings,
so you don't get the people who have already settled that question in
various ideologies, but you do get a lot of seeking students.
One group, which is according to Ibn Arabi's original audience, are
travelers or seekers - he calls them 'al-quawm' - these people are
everywhere, and they find Ibn Arabi for all sorts of reasons. Some come to
study in an academic setting, and some do so elsewhere. So one is trying to
translate the aspects of his work that appeal to those kinds of audiences,
which are its practical orientation and practical spiritual life, and that
is a very vigorous audience. Really it is pointless with that kind of
audience to distinguish between Muslim and non-Muslim, for what these people
are interested in is practical spiritual guidance and clarification, and the
particular religious setting is less important. Just as there are a lot of
people who are interested in Jewish mysticism, or Buddhist esotericism,
without becoming Jews or Buddhists, so there is a large audience interested
in Ibn Arabi, and it certainly overlaps between Muslims and non-Muslims.
Larry,
"I have always thought that the active - inactive definition of Baha'i was
worse than useless . I now prefer to refer to myself as a neo-Baha'i and I
approach teaching from this standpoint . As a neo-Baha'i I can be active in
teaching but feel no need to participate in the Baha'i community"
Good for you. It has taken me a while to come to this. I think I have been
spending the last couple of years working on my new identity and the idea of
teaching has only just begun to develop in me. I really like your concept of
a neo-Baha'i. I realise that it takes a new way of seeing oneself to teach
in the universal way that you describe.
But I'm practising and have been finding that teaching has become a whole
new world. As a member of the community, I found the concept of teaching a
nightmare. The administration pushed it down members' throats and I felt
perpetually guilty about it. No matter what I did, I never felt like I was
doing enough and if people didn't declare, which they almost always never
did, I felt I was a failure. Then I would read Baha'u'llah's exhortations to
teach, and that would put me into a tail spin. I put the books away and went
into hopelessness over it. I was envious of people's success stories because
they never happened to me.
And now, after twenty-odd years of that, I am kicked out of the community
and discover what teaching means for me! I used to be very timid about being
a Baha'i and found it difficult to tell people that I was one. Now, most
people I deal with reasonably regularly know because I tell them. Now that I
am no longer a member of the community, I guess I feel free to speak the
truth as I see it. This has been key for me. Instead of feeling like I have
to present the party line, I just say how I experience Baha'u'llah and
explain what he taught.
Probably, most of the people I regularly interact with have some interest in
religion at some level, so discussions usually revolve around sharing
experiences and understandings. I feel very comfortable with this. It means
that I can talk about my latest experiences and ideas and say openly that
they have been inspired by such-and-such a conversation with Baha'u'llah, or
such-and-such a teaching that I was reading about or whatever it was. And
the other person will do the same.
I suppose I have given away the idea of converting and have just 'come out'
over who I am and let it be other people's problem if they don't like it.
The hatred I've experienced from Baha'is has taught me not to care
particularly about other people's disapproval. Isn't it interesting that it
wasn't until I was kicked out of the community that I felt able to come out
about being a Baha'i. I feel sure that it was because I was free of the
party machine. I see this as crucial to your concept of teaching as a
neo-Baha'i.
BTW, I see no reason why your Mistress of the Word of God could not also be
the Maid of Heaven, given that the Maid of Heaven symbolises the Word of God.
Alison
Hi Randy,
I think we are saying the same thing, only in different words. By saying
that unity is the goal and justice the method, I am saying that unity is
realised - as you say, it already is in a hidden reality - but it is
manifested in the outer world when we pursue justice. Using another, less
emotive analogy, the goal is to get the tree to fruit, and the method is to
feed and water it. You can't manufacture fruit, but you can create the
conditions conducive to the tree producing it.
As I understand Baha'u'llah, he does say that the goal is to unite humanity.
But the administration is fond of saying that too. That means that when we
hear it said, we associate it with the administration and its
fundamentalism. I think it is important to go back to what Baha'u'llah
himself says and get a handle on his meaning, free of the load the
administration has put on it.
Baha'u'llah says, as Ian quoted: " The
Great Being saith: O ye children of men! The fundamental purpose animating
the Faith of God and His Religion is to safeguard the interests and promote
the unity of the human race, and to foster the spirit of love and fellowship
amongst men" (Gleanings, CX, p. 215)
I've had to rethink what Baha'u'llah means by unity of the human race here,
and I think the answer is in the next clause "foster the spirit of love and
fellowship". To my mind, unity is about eliminating hatred and building
loving bonds between people. It is hatred that causes disunity; it separates
people from each other and causes us to see the "other" as a demon. If
hatred is dispelled and love promoted, then people live together in peace
and tolerance. This fits with the tree analogy - create the conditions in
which hatred is dissolved and love promoted and the fruit of unity will grow.
I think the mistake the administration makes - and this is the point you are
making, as I understand it - is that it tries to manufacture the goal by
whatever means. In other words, it tries to manufacture the fruit rather
than create the conditions in the community that will produce it. I call
this the ideological path to unity. Using this method, you manufacture an
outer unity using party discipline. This means everyone has to do as they
are told; conscience is limited to inner brain functioning, and everything
that comes out of you is controlled. This is manufactured unity. It has
nothing to do with unity as Baha'u'llah means it, which is about dissolving
hatred and promoting love and fragrance.
And as we know, you can't dissolve hatred and build love using party
discipline. The two are opposites. As we have seen from Marxism, for
example, ideological unity is, in reality, hatred. It has not overcome the
demonising of difference.
Another thought I had about justice was that Baha'u'llah says: "O OPPRESSORS
ON EARTH! Withdraw your hands from tyranny, for I have pledged Myself not to
forgive any man's injustice. This is My covenant which I have irrevocably
decreed in the preserved tablet and sealed it with My seal of glory.
(Persian Hidden Words, no 64) Baha'u'llah has pledged himself, and made it a
part of his covenant, not to forgive any man's injustice. Doesn't sound to
me like he considered justice to be of secondary importance. You can't have
a "unity" where the rulers are unjust and condemned by Baha'u'llah.
Alison
Hi Larry,
Yes, I take your point about deferral. I know that in times of crisis, I
take a certain course of action, but feel I must wait to see the good
results and to feel a sense of peace. As you say, this deferring process is
a product of our limitations. After I have come to terms with a situation
that has gone contrary to my wishes, then the sense of deferral dissipates
and I am able to move on, reinterpreting the situation and believing it was
always meant to be that way. Baha'u'llah makes this point in the Valley of
Knowledge where the lover scales the wall. If he'd known from the beginning
what the end would bring, he wouldn't have felt that the grace of God was
being deferred.
There's another tradition, which Baha'u'llah quotes in the Gems, that came
to mind when I read your message. Baha'u'llah quotes: "The believer is
alive in both worlds." If this is a believer's everyday experience - being
aware of the physical and spiritual reality of his or her life - then the
concept of deferral becomes pretty meaningless. I try to remember the
reality of the next world as I go about my daily life. I find it helps me
get through, because I find this world so depressing. I guess I escape into
my remembrance of the spiritual world. But as I understand it, that is what
we are supposed to do: abide not but in the rose-garden of the spirit.
I read a Rumi poem once, where he argued that waiting was an illusion. In
moments where I have felt like waiting was going to overwhelm me, I have
meditated on this point. I am sometimes able to calm myself with the inner
knowledge that, as Baha'u'llah says, the end is in the beginning - in other
words, the end is already real if I experience it in my heart, even if it
isn't a reality in the physical world. At those times, I feel the covenant
present with me, and not something deferred; I know I have found its
pre-existent reality inside me. If I am not in touch with that reality, it's
because I have shifted, not God!
Alison
>>Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's
Now there's a good quote. Baha'u'llah makes the same argument in his
Commentary on a Verse by Rumi. There he argues that one cannot know if a
poor person is generous or stingy unless you give that person money. He
explains that the changes in the world, which come about through the
revelation of God's names, create changes in people's circumstances and that
brings to light new aspects of their character.
Here is the paragraph from Baha'u'llah's commentary:
"For instance, consider the divine name, "the Self-Sufficient." In its own
kingdom, this name is unified. But after its effulgence in the mirrors of
human existence, the effects of that effulgence appear in each soul
according to that soul's exigencies. For instance, in the generous it
appears as generosity, whereas in the miserly it takes the form of avarice.
In the ill-omened it becomes abasement, and in the blessed it appears as
good fortune. For in the condition of poverty, souls and what is in them
are concealed. For example, the generosity and avarice of someone who does
not possess a single penny is hidden. Likewise, in such a condition his
good or bad fortune would as yet be impossible to discern. After becoming
self-sufficient, every soul shows forth what is within it. For instance,
one might expend what he possesses in the path of God. Another might
organize war materiel and arise to engage in battle with the truth. One
might safeguard others to the point where he denies his wealth to himself
and his family. Consider how from one effulgence so many different and
contradictory things appear. But before that effulgence all these souls
were subdued, concealed and languid. With one ray from the sun of the name,
"the Self-Sufficient," how he has resurrected these souls and made visible
and manifest what was hidden within them! If you contemplate this utterance
with the eye of insight, you will become aware of hidden mysteries."
Alison
>It seem to me that the challenge to each and every one of us as human beings
I think you have stated a profound truth here, Warren.
We tend to focus entirely on justice as it manifests itself in the world.
People get themselves involved in just causes, but don't take the time to
examine their own behaviour and concern themselves with spiritual
development. Look at Osama bin Laden, to take an obvious case. He believes
he is acting in pursuit of a just cause, but has not eliminated hatred
within him and so he perpetuates injustice in the world. To me, this
demonstrates the folly of thinking that just causes alone can change the
world. Another pattern that you get is politicians claiming on the election
trail that they support this, that, and the next just cause. But then they
get into power and do something else. Why? Because the justice of the cause
they supported was not a reality within them.
I find that the best response to the world's current turmoil (a just cause
if ever there was one) is to focus on Baha'u'llah and continue my struggle
to detach from the world. It seems like running away from the challenges the
world faces, but I have found that focusing on my spiritual life generates
the power to create real change.
Alison
Dear Larry,
I've had the same experience that coming to terms with Baha'u'llah's
humanity has helped me come to terms with mine. You know how Baha'u'llah
says that he knows what is in our innermost heart all the time? Well, now,
throughout the day I find myself feeling or thinking something way down
inside me and then I remember that Baha'u'llah is witnessing it - in a
sense, he experiences it simultaneously with me. And then I sometimes have a
conversation out loud with him about it. Sometimes, I think of something
funny and then remember Baha'u'llah has just experienced it too and then
burst out laughing, knowing that we have shared a joke.
To me, Baha'u'llah's perfection is in his human-ness. He is the all
compassionate one. He is sorry when I cry in despair, even if what I am
unhappy about is a sorrow only from my limited perspective. I know he
doesn't say "get over it", but gently nurtures me through and is there to
share my delight when I witness wider horizons that make the sorrow disappear.
I've just remembered this great quote in the Iqan I found the other day.
"Nothing whatsoever keepeth Him from being occupied with any other thing".
(Qur'an 55:29) Gee, I love that! God is so huge, and yet he can be entirely
focused on me and my little world and, at the same time, be as intimately
involved in everybody else's life! He is not too big for me to be important
to him. I am possessive about Baha'u'llah, you know. But everyone else can
be possessive of him too. He would love that!
Alison
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Word of God teacheth lamentation and moaning to the nightingales
Baha'u'llah
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Larry,
"Thinking about what would motivate a God/dess to create the conditions
necessary for phenomenal existence , it seemed obvious that aloneness could
be such a motive."
I agree. I think this is the import of the very famous and much loved
hadith: "I was a hidden treasure and loved to be known, therefore I created
the creation so that I might be known".
The mystic, Ibn Arabi, taught me a lot about God's yearning for us - each of
us. It puts a whole new spin on what religion is at its core. It's not about
institutions but getting back to that pre-existent place within ourselves
where we remember our connection to our inner Beloved, who is our own divine
self. As Baha'u'llah says in the Gems:
"Til I chose your love as my religion
Alison
Amen to all that you say, Larry.
Now, if there was some way to get the rest of the world to see it that way
too. I've been doing a lot of thinking about that. Any ideas on that score?
What I've come to so far is that it makes little difference what a person
says exactly. The important thing is more the spirit in which it is said.
But now that I come to think about it, Baha'u'llah gives principles for
speech. I've looked them up and here they are:
1. For utterance to be penetrating, it must be refined and this is
conditioned on the heart being detached and pure.
2. Utterance needs to be moderate. Moderation is "obtained by blending
utterance with the tokens of divine wisdom which are recorded in the sacred
Books and Tablets."
"Thus when the essence of one's utterance is endowed with these two
requisites it will prove highly effective and will be the prime factor in
transforming the souls of men. This is the station of supreme victory and
celestial dominion. Whoso attaineth thereto is invested with the power to
teach the Cause of God and to prevail over the hearts and souls of men."
Quotes from Tablets pp198-199
Alison
>Detachment does not mean running away from reality, it means seeking through
Well put, Warren. I've memorised it, along with your other comment about the
primary importance of *being* justice.
I think, though, there is a general misunderstanding that detachment means
running away from reality. This hit home to me when I was tossed out of the
community. The NSA guy living locally accused local Baha'is sympathetic to
my case of not being detached, in the sense that they were allowing their
emotions to cloud their judgement. This is a common argument. The idea is
that if you have compassion for someone when it is socially inconvenient to
do so, then that is not being detached.
But, the NSA guy, who claims to be detached, is in fact denying reality and,
ironically, caught up in self and passion.
Alison
Tony,
Of course you are right that I don't need to refer to how language
determines meaning in order to argue that freedom of speech is related to
freedom of thought, but I am sold on this stuff. I think it is fascinating.
I've just finished reading an article by the linguist Ferdinand de Saussure.
It was a short piece called Course in General Linguistics (out of a larger
work, I think). In this article he explains what language is and how we work
in it. I was glued to the page. It is very complex, but to give an idea of
what he is saying, he explains that language is not the signs, concepts and
sound-images, but the relationship between all these. One word has a meaning
only in relation to others around it. One example he gives is that in a
language in which you have a dual, like in Arabic, the plural in that
language has a different meaning to the plural in English.
To give an idea of how he sees language, he likens it to a chess game.
Language is like the rules of the game. He says that no piece on the board
has meaning in isolation. The meaning of each piece is determined by its
position on the board at any one time. And this is changing constantly as
the game is played. The same is true of words or signs. They have no meaning
in isolation, this is given to them by the system of language. And the
meaning changes over time.
It seems to me that the AO, or any other dominating worldly power, achieves
power by trying to control the rules of the chess game. It is able through
various means to impose its own rules of the language game and in that way
determine the meaning each one of us plays in the community. So for example,
the House controls discourse in the community and has been able insist that
I play the role of the abased apostate, using the words "no longer a member
of the community, therefore not a Baha'i'. Similarly, I think, the Bush
administration has created the "issue" of Iraq out of language. If the
liberals are able to make moves on the chess board, then they have the power
to change the meaning of words and the part that they play in the community.
This is a threat.
Baha'u'llah, as I understand the Iqan, is arguing that God in fact sets the
rules and gives meaning to everything through his Word. And, as Baha'is, we
are asked to see the whole human experiment through his eyes. I now
understand this to mean that we must see human affairs through *his* story,
which he demonstrates in the Iqan repeats throughout history. It is a
metastory in pre-existence. And he explains what that story is: in general,
there is the hero, who is the manifestation but doesn't have to be a
manifestation, it is potentially each one of us; and there is his followers;
and there are the bad guys who call the hero a sorcerer, infidel and such
like. The hero must be abased. This is important, otherwise the badies
wouldn't not be sorted from the goodies.
And what distinguishes the goodies from the badies is the person's ability
to see the role the hero is playing within the divine story, and not the
role the hero is playing within the story created by those who appear to
dominate the rules of the game. To see the reality of the divine story
requires detachment. Proof of detachment is the ability to shift oneself
from operating in the worldly story to operating entirely in the divine one.
People who have made such shifts act in ways that are inexplicable, such as
the martyrs dancing to their deaths. They are manifesting a total
renunciation of all meaning and value held by their contemporaries.
My feeling is that this is what we must become if we want to see change in
the Baha'i community.
Alison
>Well they do say the history of mankind is the history of war.
But the point I was making before, and the same goes again here, is *who*
says this and on what basis? You thought you'd found a contradiction, but
there may not be a contradiction if these assertions are false.
As you pointed out, if the history of mankind is the history of war, then
there will be no history when war is eliminated. I think this sort of
thinking comes from people who feel there must a war, or other conflict, to
keep their interest in life up.
Alison
Dear Warren,
Your long message brought up so many issues. The first one is about there
not being safe opportunities in the community for people to speak about
their personal lives. Dear God, I recall our local community debating this
issue endlessly! Developing a safe environment for people to speak was never
really achieved, except occasionally when the chairing was good. I agree
with you that this is a key issue. Unless the places where people consult
are safe and supportive, I don't believe any sense of community can be
developed. For, as you go on to say, people learn by hearing other people's
stories. They find out that they are not the only ones who experience a
certain thing, and they bond and grow.
I think the idea that if you have a problem, you take it "through the proper
channels" is isolating, just as you say. It is a way to control people. I
remember clearly the feeling I had when I first joined Talisman and
discovered that people *on the other side of the world* faced the same
community problems as we did here at the bottom of the world. And we
discovered that the proper channels were a dead-end everywhere.
I also agree that the Faith can be an addiction, like alcoholism. Like you,
in the early days of my Baha'i life, I made some poor decisions that
impacted badly on my daughter. I was a sole parent through my twenties,
which were her early childhood years. Looking back, I cannot believe that I
placed the interests of the local assembly over hers to some extent. I got
nominal support from the assembly, but no real concern for my family
circumstances. The group dynamic in the assembly was more about finding the
poor sucker who'd do the secretarial work. And that was me, for a few years.
Now, in my new Baha'i life, I have found a way to integrate my Baha'i-ness
with the rest of my life. Rather than see "being a Baha'i" as being separate
from the other aspects of me, "being a Baha'i" is the animating purpose
behind all that I do. There is no separation between the "Baha'i me" and the
other mes.
I've already mentioned that I am reading a book by Bruce Lawrence called
"Defenders of God", which is a discussion on fundamentalism. I have just
read his discussion about the difference between ideology and religion. He
is arguing that fundamentalism is a religious ideology. In one of his many
comparisons between religion and ideology, he says that:
"Ideology is motivational to this world, not cognizant or reflective of the
other world. It is on this point that the content of ideology and religion
diverge most widely. Religions are marked by rites of passage for the
individual, while ideologies aim to mobilize energies toward achieving
corporate goals. It could be said that religion focuses on maximizing
individual benefit through group participation, while ideology is intent on
maximizing group benefit through individual participation. The this-worldly
aspect of ideology should be not mistaken for crude materialism. Ideologies
do appeal to deep-seated human instincts. In this sense, they are
quasi-religious." (p79)
My thinking is that the Baha'i administration has turned the Faith into an
ideology and away from a religion. Islamic fundamentalists are open about
the fact that they have turned Islam into an ideology. The Faith is run by
ideologues. This explains why, if you get close to the Baha'i
administration, corporate interests take over, and one's personal spiritual
path becomes secondary, if not completely forgotten. You think you are a
member of a religion, but discover that something else is going on.
Alison
Benjamin,
As I see it, it isn't a matter of me or any person judging another person.
As I understand Baha'u'llah, he is arguing that the measure is all in our
nearness to God.
I'll give an analogy. Let's say we have a warehouse full of people and it is
very cold outside. There is a fire in the warehouse but it is invisible.
Everyone feels the cold, but only some stand quietly and sense a source of
warmth. In order to achieve this, they have had to quiet themselves from the
babble of others complaining about the cold. These ones, sensing the heat,
move towards it and feel warm. But in order to do this, they had to move
away from the crowd of babblers. They are taunted for doing so, because envy
sets in. The babblers sense these people may be warm but won't make the
effort to feel it themselves and improve their situation. They get a lot out
of being a babbler. Perhaps they are the leaders of the babblers.
Each person has the chance and the choice to move close to God. And it is on
this decision that God, not others, judges us. But the situation is set up
so that "judgement" is something that takes place all the time. It isn't a
matter of a person passing down a judgement as in a court, our position in
the warehouse and our behaviour there and the extent to which we move closer
to the source of warmth is our 'judgement'. Judgement isn't something that
takes place later, in another realm, it is happening all the time. Right
now, in the warehouse. The babblers can't see that they are being judged and
are suffering the consequences of their decisions. They believe that
judgement is a thing that takes place between them. They have judged those
who have moved towards the warmth and believe this judgement is real. But in
fact the touchstone is nearness to God, which is not a part of the babblers'
reality.
"Tear asunder, in My Name, the veils that have grievously blinded your
vision, and, through the power born of your belief in the unity of God,
scatter the idols of vain imitation. Enter, then, the holy paradise of the
good-pleasure of the All-Merciful. Sanctify your souls from whatsoever is
not of God, and taste ye the sweetness of rest within the pale of His vast
and mighty Revelation, and beneath the shadow of His supreme and infallible
authority. Suffer not yourselves to be wrapt in the dense veils of your
selfish desires, inasmuch as I have perfected in every one of you My
creation, so that the excellence of My handiwork may be fully revealed unto
men. It follows, therefore, that every man hath been, and will continue to
be, able of himself to appreciate the Beauty of God, the Glorified. Had he
not been endowed with such a capacity, how could he be called to account for
his failure? If, in the Day when all the peoples of the earth will be
gathered together, any man should, whilst standing in the presence of God,
be asked: "Wherefore hast thou disbelieved in My Beauty and turned away
from My Self," and if such a man should reply and say: "Inasmuch as all men
have erred, and none hath been found willing to turn his face to the Truth,
I, too, following their example, have grievously failed to recognize the
Beauty of the Eternal," such a plea will, assuredly, be rejected. For the
faith of no man can be conditioned by any one except himself." Gleanings, LXXV
Alison
>John:
I don't think that he saw a contradiction between the effulgences being
placed within us and their being generated by our soul. The process of
generation by the soul is the same as the process by which they are placed
within us. What other possibilities are there? The effulgences can either
well up from within us or be flashed magically into us from outside.
>John:
I don't see fana' and baqa' in this way. I don't think they entail the
annihilation of the self in the sense of annihilating our personality and
sensual and other experience. I think it is more a case of awakening to the
fact that God is inside you experiencing all that you experience. If you
shut down all that you are in an effort to experience fana', then you shut
down God too. All you have achieved is the annihilation of the effulgences
placed in you. As you see, so does God. As you hear, so does God. As you
think, so does God. You and God are joint subjects of your experience. Your
experience is God's experience of you. What you are is what God knows you to
be. Being aware of this all the time is baqa', or living in God. You realise
that the medium by which you exist and have experiences is the medium of
God. All that you experience is experienced within him.
Fana', death of the self, is dying to the illusion that you exist outside of
God. "Self" is the belief that you act independently of God, rather than
through him. When you recognise that your real partner is God and that he is
inside you and always will be and that you can never be parted and he will
aid you and bring you joy, everything else becomes unimportant. You "forget
your soul, spirit, body and very being", as Baha'u'llah explains. I don't
think he means for this to be taken literally, so much as an allusion to the
ecstacy you experience when you experience "union" with God. The mystic
becomes forgetful of self because she is taken up in ecstacy, not because
she is trying to annihilate herself.
Alison
Warren said:
That's right. (along with everything else you said!)
Today at Mashriq, we had a reading from the Mathnavi. There were a couple of
lines in there that I think say what you are saying:
"Love means a letting go of mortal life
And here it is again in the Words of Wisdom:
"The essence of love is for man to turn his heart to the Beloved One, and
sever himself from all else save Him, and desire naught save that which is
the desire of his Lord."
We generally think that to love a person is to turn our hearts towards that
person. That, of course, is correct, but it is not wholly so. I hear
Baha'u'llah saying that the way to love is to turn one's heart to God, the
Beloved One inside ourselves, and find the divine presence in there. From
that place, are we able to truly love another person. As you say, because
when I know the God in me, then I recognise and bear witness to the God in
you. Mutual recognition is what we experience as love, I think.
>Are you familiar with the Twenty Third Psalm?
"The Lord is my shepherd...": yes, I used to sing it at church when I was a
child.
Alison
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cloud of the Loved One's mercy
Baha'u'llah
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Liam,
That certainly is an impressive search story. If you keep searching like
that, with sincerity, honesty (to yourself) and passion, you are certain to
find all the answers you seek.
My other general reaction to the end-bit of your story was this: relax!
You're doing a fabulous job walking your spiritual path. You are already
doing it, and are a role model to all on Talisman.
You seem to be concerned about "which religion to chose", but I think this
isn't necessarily the key issue. That's the sort of question that society
values, but I think it would be a pity if you felt a sense of urgency to
*make a decision* when that wasn't right for you. As your story shows, you
will make key decisions - such as the one to believe in a creator - when
that time is right for you. I think it is more important for you to continue
following your heart and nose. Things will be sure to fall into place as you
go, as they already have done.
I think the best way to know Baha'u'llah and to decide whether you think he
is a prophet or sociologist is to read his writings extensively.
I certainly understand your concern about being disillusioned again. There
are people on this list who once believed in Baha'u'llah but have changed
their minds about that belief. For me, there have been a few times in my
Baha'i life when I felt disillusioned, but never lost faith. My experience
is that if you seek answers from Baha'u'llah, they will always come. If you
feel disappointed on your journey, it is not necessarily the end of your
journey, it is simply a new beginning. The journey will only stop if you
stop searching. People do stop searching because they become heart-broken,
but I think to stop searching is to die.
You don't have to join the Baha'i community to be a Baha'i. I am not a
member of the community but I am a Baha'i. That is the way some people avoid
the nastiness that goes on in the community while retaining its spiritual oasis.
As for your feeling that you never felt anything spiritual in the past, this
is simply socialisation. You have been socialised to view the world in a
certain way; in fact, what you experience as "you" is simply a bundle of
values that you hold at any one time. As these values change, the sense of
"you" does also. These values are so natural to you, you don't realise that
they make you up. But when your spiritual search leads you to question them,
then that becomes scary, because the journey is asking us to sacrifice
"self". The lesson in this is that the sense of "death" we experience when
the self changes is an illusion. Another word for this process is
transformation.
As I said, if your spiritual sense was defunct, you would never have written
that message to Talisman.
Alison
"I compare his views to the idea of Baha'u'llah of a "new race of men," an
idea that is present perhaps in all religions that teach about an end time
where a Golden Age of some kind is inaugurated."
Dear Randy,
I think that when Baha'u'llah refers to a "new race of men" he means *us*
and not some future generation in a Golden Age. By that, I mean that we have
the potential to be a new race of men, whether or not we realise that
potential is another thing. Here's the quote:
"The day is approaching when God will have, by an act of His Will, raised up
a race of men the nature of which is inscrutable to all save God, the
All-Powerful, the Self-Subsisting. He shall purify them from the defilement
of idle fancies and corrupt desires, shall lift them up to the heights of
holiness, and shall cause them to manifest the signs of His sovereignty and
might upon earth. Thus hath it been ordained by God, the All-Glorious, the
All-Loving." Suriy-i-Haykal in Summons of the Lord of Hosts, para 8
The first point I want to make is that I think we live in the "golden age"
right now. Here's Baha'u'llah in the Mathnavi (lines 147-155):
"Once someone posed this question to a gnostic:
Of course this passage has many meanings, but the meaning I want to take out
of it is that Baha'u'llah is contrasting two understandings of the "time"
when we are in God's presence and he asks us 'Am I not your Lord?' and we,
in theory, say 'yes'. The first gnostic says that he recalls that time as a
past event, but the second gnostic knows that the "time" when that exchange
took place was in pre-existence - in other words, it is happening all the
time. Every moment of our existence that question and answer is repeated.
Every moment is, therefore, a very great moment. In addition, Baha'u'llah
also asks us the same question via his revelation - Baha'u'llah asks us to
recognise him as Lord - and so we are living in that "time" in that sense too.
The point I am wanting to make is that we should not undervalue the day in
which we live - both because Baha'u'llah's revelation is a return of the
time in pre-existence when we were asked the question that created the
covenant, and because that moment recurs every moment of our lives. On this
basis, I argue that we live in the "Golden Age" right now. We waste our
lives if we "forget" our pre-existent connection to God, and think that only
those in times gone by or in some golden future are the ones to carry out
the important work of the Cause. If we are not a new race of men now, then
that isn't because we are not gifted, it is because we left the new race of
men to a future generation. The 'new race of men' will be the one that
refuses to dream about the future, and grasps the present opportunity. This
very attitude will be the key to attracting the unimaginable bounties.
Another point I wanted to make is mentioned in passing by Baha'u'llah a few
paragraphs later. In paragraph 14, still referring to the new race of men,
Baha'u'llah says: "Were they to unloose their tongues to extol their Lord,
the denizens of earth and heaven would join in their anthems of praise - yet
how few are they who hear! And were they to glorify their Lord, all created
things would join in their hymns of glory. Thus hath God exalted them above
the rest of His creation, and yet the people remain unaware!"
The paragraph suggests that even though God has raised up the new race of
men, only a few will hear what they have to say, and people will largely
remain unaware. This doesn't fit with the usual dream that when God raises
up these good people, everyone will naturally recognise their wisdom and
take them as leaders.
The fact that the people will not recognise the new race of men is
consistent with what Sen calls the doctrine of two sovereignties. God has
given sovereignty of the world to the kings and rulers, but he has kept the
sovereignty of the heart for himself. This distinction leads to the curious
situation where Baha'u'llah, although a prisoner on earth and to all intents
and purposes completely without power, is at the same time the sovereign of
the spiritual world.
It is therefore likely that the new race of men will live among the people
and the people will not know it.
Alison
Larry,
I don't think that Baha'u'llah holds to a linear, hierarchical view of
station. I think that is a misreading of an important theme in his thought.
Baha'u'llah argues that *love* is a sovereignty, a spiritual sovereignty,
and that this is the only sovereignty worth having - that is, worldly
sovereignty (which you get in a linear hierarchy such as the one you
describe) is as nothing beside a spiritual sovereignty borne of love. This
spiritual sovereignty does not come as a result of lauding it over people.
It comes from loving God even in adversity. A person who loves God and is
grateful even in adversity is a person who demonstrates in their actions
that they know that love is a greater sovereignty than worldly vanities. In
the quote from Prayers and Meditations, Baha'u'llah is saying that this
spiritual sovereignty is so wonderful that even kings (the symbols of
worldly sovereignty) would long for it.
"O SON OF SPIRIT! My first counsel is this: Possess a pure, kindly and
radiant heart, that thine may be a sovereignty ancient, imperishable and
everlasting." (Baha'u'llah: Arabic Hidden Words, no 1)
As for the new race of men, the passage in which Baha'u'llah speaks of them
refers to the fact that these people are *characterised* by their choice to
renounce worldly vanities in favour of maintaining in their hearts the love
of God. They are "purified from the defilment of idle fancies and corrupt
desires":
"The day is approaching when God will have, by an act of His Will, raised up
a race of men the nature of which is inscrutable to all save God, the
All-Powerful, the Self-Subsisting. He shall purify them from the defilement
of idle fancies and corrupt desires, shall lift them up to the heights of
holiness, and shall cause them to manifest the signs of His sovereignty and
might upon earth. Thus hath it been ordained by God, the All-Glorious, the
All-Loving." Suriy-i-Haykal in Summons of the Lord of Hosts, para 8
The hierarchy you describe is a corrupt desire and by definition a person
who was into that sort of thing could not have the spiritual sovereignty
Baha'u'llah alludes to here.
It is important to understand that a person who is good, in that they love
God above all else, is a great person; but their greatness does not reside
in the fact that they are better than others. Their greatness stems from
their choice to love God and not worldly vanities. Such a person embodies
the principle: "Poverty is my glory".
Alison
From: Juan Cole
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 09:06:09 -0400
Subject: Messsianic Concealment and Theophanic Disclosure
Date: Thu Jul 18, 2002 8:33 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Re: FEAR Digest Number 1017
Date: Mon Jul 22, 2002 8:47 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Balancing structure and spontanaity ?
Date: Thu Jul 25, 2002 9:02 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Re: Current world situation
Date: Sun Aug 11, 2002 11:22 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Turning the tide
>officials: cases of arrested spiritual development?
Date: Wed Aug 14, 2002 11:24 am
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Abdu'l-Baha on war
>no influence! How truly amazing! For instance, the belief in the
>difference of races is pure imagination, and yet it exerts great
>sway. Though all are human, nevertheless, some have named
>themselves Slavonic, others German, Chinese, French or British.
>But this difference of races is pure fantasy. How powerful will
>be when all are one and the same! It is clearly evident that the
>whole of humanity is one, but this truth has no currency, whereas
>racial difference, which is fiction and illusory, has great
>predominance.
Date: Tue Sep 3, 2002 9:44 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Belief in God and spirituality
Date: Wed Sep 4, 2002 9:35 am
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Belief in God and spirituality
>down through our attachment to how we conceive the ones we love , which
>includes ourselves and can include God Itself .
Its beginning is pain, and its end is death."
Date: Mon Sep 23, 2002 5:01 pm
Subject: teaching
Date: Tue Sep 24, 2002 9:13 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] teaching
Date: Mon Sep 30, 2002 8:40 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Re: teaching
Date: Mon Oct 7, 2002 8:51 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] the covenant
Date: Mon Oct 21, 2002 7:56 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Fwd: UU NEWS October 20, 2002
>>character, give him power.
>>
>>-- Abraham Lincoln
Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:47 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] teaching (Social Justice)
>must be not to seek Justice for ourselves or our causes but to learn to
>become Just Persons. To be dispensers of justice to others.
Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:47 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] What to tell our children ?
warbling upon the bough of remoteness and bereavement, instructeth them
in the art of love's ways, and showeth them the secret of heart-surrender.
Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 7:48 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] what to tell our children ?
I remained without an orthodoxy
How surprised and shocked I should be afterward
If I were not completely bewildered at you."
Date: Tue Oct 29, 2002 8:41 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] what to tell our children ?
Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 8:39 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] teaching (Social Justice)
>prayer and meditiation a more conscious contact with spiritual reality and
>allowing it to influence our responses to the world around us rather than be
>reacting to these influences emotionaly and irrationally.
Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 11:37 am
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Freedom of Conscience
Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 8:54 pm
Subject: contradictions
Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 8:12 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] self-censorship
Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 7:57 am
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Freedom of Conscience
Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 10:02 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Theo-semiotics
>Sure, I have no problem with this. But it's not what Abdul Baha
>writes: He writes that the mystic knower experiences "traces and
>effulgences" of God that *have been placed* within us. He does not
>say that these have been produced by us. Anyway, I'm getting close to
>splitting hairs here so I'll desist on this one.
>It is not a mystical vision and I think it would be wrong to
>associate mysticism too strongly with with visionary experiences. In
>fact, most mystical traditions are sceptical of "visions"; and with
>good reason for in many cases they are probably just the result of a
>rich and active subliminal consciousness. They distract the seeker
>from his/her true goal which is *fana* - extinction, cessation,
>annihilation, passing away of the self/ego/personality and absorption
>in "God".
Date: Fri Dec 6, 2002 9:39 pm
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Theo-semiotics
>If I know The God in me and you know The God in you, We know The God in each
>other.
to claim with heart and soul eternity."
raineth only on the garden of the spirit.
Date: Sat Dec 21, 2002 8:24 am
Subject: Re: [talisman9] Potential convert with serious questions
Date: Fri Dec 27, 2002 8:26 pm
Subject: new race of men
O you, who've grasped the mysteries of God
O you, by bounty's wine intoxicate
do you recall the day of 'Am I not?'
He said: I do recall that sound, those words
as if it were but yesterday, no less!
It lingers ever in my ears, His call
that sweet, soul-vivifying voice of His.
Another gnostic, who had climbed beyond
had bored the mystic pearls divine, replied:
That day of God has never ended nor
has fallen short, we're living in that day!
His day's unending, not pursued by night-
That we're alive in such a day's not strange
Had Time's Soul ceased its yearning for this day
then Heaven's court and throne would fall to dust
For through God's power this eternal day
was made unending by His Majesty."
Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 7:16 am
Subject: Re: [talisman9] new race of men