| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Poststructuralist
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 1:05 am Post subject: Re: Pilgrims' Notes |
 |
|
Kent Johnson wrote:
| Quote: | You certainly allow, for example Tom, to go down the wrong road. I don
't
see you correcting his errors of understanding of your ideas. He trust
s
you, apparently, and you are misusing that trust if you allow him to
continue to believe unauthenticated means pilgrims' notes. I would
appreciate it if you could state clearly what you do believe since at l
east
two of your readers need it.
|
I don't understand what you wrote in that paragraph.
| Quote: | I believe if you were to continue the misconception that Pilgrims Notes
and
unauthenticated texts are the same thing, and then name the entire book
s PUP
and Paris Talks as unauthenticated texts, besides being dishonest, you
would
lose a lot of respect as and academic and a Baha'i.
|
I never said they "are the same thing." I said that unauthenticated
talks, like pilgrims' notes, are not scriptural.
| Quote: | So please, instead of talking what you did or didn't say, and what is
popular and unpopular, spend a few minutes telling us what you believe
about
those texts.
|
I believe that some of those texts can be useful for purposes of
individual inspiration, but that they have no authority.
| Quote: | And without doing so yourself you have left the clear impression that P
UP
and Paris Talks are unauthenticated, and further, that they "hold the
status" of Pilgrims' notes. If that is not correct in your view, it is
long
past the time when you should clarify your meaning.
|
I never said that they were unauthenticated. I said that the talks
contained within them would need to be authenticated.
| Quote: | Is the passage "You must become distinguished for loving humanity..."
scriptural? Is it authenticated? Does it hold the status of pilgrims'
notes? Until you answer those questions clearly that you believe it do
es
reflect Baha'i ideas accurately you are throwing doubt on our teachings
...
Why, Mark? What does anyone gain, and what higher purpose do you serve
by
doubting that passage?
|
I think you are confusing authentication with inspiration. The first is
is objective. The second is subjective.
| Quote: | And if it "cannot be treated as scriptural" does that mean it is untrue
?
That we should doubt it? That the translators were Covenant Breakers w
ith
little experience translating unfamiliar with prevalent beliefs of soci
ety
in 1912?
|
If you mean *truth* from a Baha'i standpoint, the measure would be
statements which are authenticated.
--
Regards, Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * http://www.markfoster.net
"... the modern challenge is how to live with uncertainty. The
basic fault lines today are not between people with different
beliefs but between people who hold these beliefs with an
element of uncertainty and people who hold these beliefs with
a pretense of certitude." — Peter L. Berger, sociologist |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 5:07 pm Post subject: The belief, not the person |
|
|
I believe it is a valid point to discuss that some in the Bahá'i community
wish to discount the validity of some highly regarded Writings using two
vague letters from Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice. It
appears to me discussing these items detached from love and hatred changes
this discussion not a bit.
This forum is not worth keeping if a frank and open discussion is viewed as
harassment and taken personally. I am not in the place of power that can
stop others from believing a challenge to what I view as a harmful belief,
as a matter of faith, is a personal attack.
Anyone who takes challenges to their beliefs as personal a personal attack
is likely to respond to such attacks personally. If those beliefs are
Baha'i beliefs that person could respond personally and therefore
misrepresent the Faith of God, alienate all readers, draw bad publicity to
the Faith, and provide endless examples to bloggers about how bad Baha'is
are. This used to happen all the time, and I am sure still does. I could
name people who we all know who have been alienated by Baha'i behavior. I
am often alienated by Baha'i behavior. We can deny that we do this. Or
look at our behavior and the causes of the behavior frankly and openly,
acknowledge our faults and vow to do better.
many people, me included have legitimate concerns, and challenge Baha'i
beliefs we don't like. As Baha'is we need to let them, and not take it
personally when those challenged beliefs are our own.
As a Baha'i, as a matter of my Faith in Baha'u'llah, I believe I need to
publicly challenge publicly presented Baha'i views that I find harmful to my
community, its unity, and my faith. Where if not here is the appropriate
place for me to do that? Should I write a book? Should this come out of
left field, quoting people saying all kinds of silly and stupid things and
challenging those things without them given and opportunity to respond
"detached from love and hatred"?
In a forum such as this people can examine their beliefs and the beliefs of
others, and own what they think with honor. But only if they can separate
their beliefs from their persons. For me this is a crisis of faith, the
Baha'i Faith. I believe I am bound by duty, bound by God to examine and
independently investigate His Word, and further, to teach my understanding
to others. I find that my understanding is very different from others who
share, in name, my Baha'i Faith.
Can I believe as I believe and remain a Baha'i? Can I examine the beliefs
of other Baha'is, and challenge those beliefs in a frank and open
discussion? Or is the unity of the Baha'i Faith to exclude people who do
that?
--Kent
"Susan Maneck" <smaneck@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:-ZGdnaz31e1N-BXVnZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: | As a Bahá'i it is my duty from God to investigate that your reasons for
robbing the Bahá'i community of confidence in the truths presented in t
hese
books.
|
Are you an ABM for Protection these days? Because if you were really
investigating the truth as an individual in the manner in which
Baha'u'llah says we should 'detached from love and hatred' you would
not be using emotionally loaded words like "robbing the Baha'i
community of confidence." |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Richard H. Gravelly
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:52 pm Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kent Johnson" <kent@compx2.com>
| Quote: | I believe it is a valid point to discuss that some in the Bahá'i comm
unity
wish to discount the validity of some highly regarded Writings using tw
o
vague letters from Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice.
|
Kent, I read your entire missive. What is a "highly regarded Writing" th
e
validity of which can be discounted by "vague letters from Shoghi Effendi
and the Universal House of Justice"? Can you identify the specific items
to
which you are referring? I may have missed something.
I am very curious.
Richard. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:57 pm Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
Kent,
I see you have abused your position as one of moderators to post your
own message when someone else was supposed to have been moderating and
would likely have rejected your message.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 7:07 AM, Kent Johnson <kent@compx2.com> wrote:
| Quote: | I believe it is a valid point to discuss that some in the Bahá'i commun
ity
wish to discount the validity of some highly regarded Writings using two
vague letters from Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice.
|
As has been pointing out to you again and again these are *not*
Writings, they are talks. And there is nothing 'vaque' about the
communications from the Guardian and the House. At most the House
indicates that the authority of some of those talks will have to be
determined at a later date.
| Quote: | This forum is not worth keeping if a frank and open discussion is viewed
as
harassment and taken personally.
|
If didn't want your comments to be taken personally, if you had been
seriously interested it examining the issue rather than attacking
personalities you would not have started this thread by naming the
people you wish to pick a fight with.
I am not in the place of power that can
| Quote: | stop others from believing a challenge to what I view as a harmful belief
,
as a matter of faith, is a personal attack.
|
But you are in a place of power to make such attacks and bypass the
person who is supposed to be moderating as you did today.
Anyone who takes challenges to their beliefs as personal a personal attack
| Quote: | is likely to respond to such attacks personally.
|
Anyone who begins threads out of the blue by naming those people whose
views they wish to attack is obviously wanting to get personal.
If those beliefs are
| Quote: | Baha'i beliefs that person could respond personally and therefore
misrepresent the Faith of God, alienate all readers, draw bad publicity t
o
the Faith, and provide endless examples to bloggers about how bad Baha'is
are.
|
And you think your behavior doesn't do that?
Or
| Quote: | look at our behavior and the causes of the behavior frankly and openly,
acknowledge our faults and vow to do better.
|
How willing are you to do that Kent?
Should this come out of
That is exactly what happens when you start threads this way. All we
see is an attack coming out of left field.
But only if they can separate
| Quote: | their beliefs from their persons.
|
Then go ahead and separate beliefs from persons and don't name names
when you start these kinds of threads. You also might considering not
accusing people of harming or robbing the Baha'i community.
| Quote: | Can I believe as I believe and remain a Baha'i? Can I examine the belief
s
of other Baha'is, and challenge those beliefs in a frank and open
discussion?
|
Sure you can. The problem is that isn't what you have bene doing. You
have been attacking people out of the blue and making outrageous
charges against them. It seems to me you are the one who can't seem to
be tolerant.
Susan |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:02 pm Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
| Quote: | Kent, I read your entire missive. What is a "highly regarded Writing" the
validity of which can be discounted by "vague letters from Shoghi Effendi
and the Universal House of Justice"?
|
Dear Richard,
The 'highly regarded Writings" which Kent refers to are not Writings
at all, they are talks contained in texts like PUP. The supposedly
'vague' letters from the Guardian and the Universal House of Justice
are ones where the Guardian insists that oral accounts cannot be given
precedence over what is clearly in the Writings and where the House of
Justice indicates that the authority of various talks in PUP will have
to examined individually as we have transcripts for some but not all
of these talks.
warmest, Susan |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:41 am Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
Hi Richard.
I regard highly the passage from Promulgation of Universal Peace that begins
"You must become distinguished for loving humanity, for unity and accord,
for love and justice." (I am quoting from memory, actually the memory of
those verses to music). I assume they are highly regarded by other Baha'is
as well since I have heard that passage sung frequently in rounds and
accompanied.
Anyway, some on this forum have been discounting the book that passage is
found. I see Susan has answered you, but I have not yet read what she said.
Perhaps you could keep up with this discussion and give me your input to the
situation.
--Kent
"Richard H. Gravelly" <rgravelly@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:uLWdnfN49sj2vhfVnZ2dnUVZ_r7inZ2d@giganews.com...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kent Johnson" <kent@compx2.com>
| Quote: | I believe it is a valid point to discuss that some in the Bahá'i comm
unity
wish to discount the validity of some highly regarded Writings using tw
o
vague letters from Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice.
|
Kent, I read your entire missive. What is a "highly regarded Writing" th
e
validity of which can be discounted by "vague letters from Shoghi Effendi
and the Universal House of Justice"? Can you identify the specific items
to
which you are referring? I may have missed something.
I am very curious.
Richard. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:47 am Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
Hi Susan,
You have been posting this week, as has Tom and Mark. I am unclear why you
think I have abused my position while you have not.
On what issue would the message been rejected? If anyone thinks my message
violates anything in the Charter I would appreciate informing me what it
violates. I believe Mark posted the Charter recently, perhaps it is time to
post it again.
"If didn't want your comments to be taken personally..."
I don't dignify such comments with reply in most cases, but this time I will
say that I have read your comments. It seems to me a lot of telling me why
I am what I am and directly forbidden in the Charter.
--Kent
"Susan Maneck" <smaneck@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7K-dnXoPOu0YvhfVnZ2dnUVZ_qLinZ2d@giganews.com...
Kent,
I see you have abused your position as one of moderators to post your
own message when someone else was supposed to have been moderating and
would likely have rejected your message.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 7:07 AM, Kent Johnson <kent@compx2.com> wrote:
| Quote: | I believe it is a valid point to discuss that some in the Bahá'i commun
ity
wish to discount the validity of some highly regarded Writings using two
vague letters from Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice.
|
As has been pointing out to you again and again these are *not*
Writings, they are talks. And there is nothing 'vaque' about the
communications from the Guardian and the House. At most the House
indicates that the authority of some of those talks will have to be
determined at a later date.
| Quote: | This forum is not worth keeping if a frank and open discussion is viewed
as
harassment and taken personally.
|
If didn't want your comments to be taken personally, if you had been
seriously interested it examining the issue rather than attacking
personalities you would not have started this thread by naming the
people you wish to pick a fight with.
I am not in the place of power that can
| Quote: | stop others from believing a challenge to what I view as a harmful belief
,
as a matter of faith, is a personal attack.
|
But you are in a place of power to make such attacks and bypass the
person who is supposed to be moderating as you did today.
Anyone who takes challenges to their beliefs as personal a personal attack
| Quote: | is likely to respond to such attacks personally.
|
Anyone who begins threads out of the blue by naming those people whose
views they wish to attack is obviously wanting to get personal.
If those beliefs are
| Quote: | Baha'i beliefs that person could respond personally and therefore
misrepresent the Faith of God, alienate all readers, draw bad publicity t
o
the Faith, and provide endless examples to bloggers about how bad Baha'is
are.
|
And you think your behavior doesn't do that?
Or
| Quote: | look at our behavior and the causes of the behavior frankly and openly,
acknowledge our faults and vow to do better.
|
How willing are you to do that Kent?
Should this come out of
That is exactly what happens when you start threads this way. All we
see is an attack coming out of left field.
But only if they can separate
| Quote: | their beliefs from their persons.
|
Then go ahead and separate beliefs from persons and don't name names
when you start these kinds of threads. You also might considering not
accusing people of harming or robbing the Baha'i community.
| Quote: | Can I believe as I believe and remain a Baha'i? Can I examine the belief
s
of other Baha'is, and challenge those beliefs in a frank and open
discussion?
|
Sure you can. The problem is that isn't what you have bene doing. You
have been attacking people out of the blue and making outrageous
charges against them. It seems to me you are the one who can't seem to
be tolerant.
Susan |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:25 am Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
| Quote: | You have been posting this week, as has Tom and Mark. I am unclear why you
think I have abused my position while you have not.
|
Dear Kent,
I posted when Tom could not. When it was determined that Mark would
post this week I stopped posting.
| Quote: | On what issue would the message been rejected?
|
It contained personal attacks.
It seems to me a lot of telling me why
| Quote: | I am what I am and directly forbidden in the Charter.
|
It says nothing about 'why you are what you are.' What it does it
explain what you have been doing and why they constitute personal
attacks and harrassment.
Susan |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Richard H. Gravelly
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:23 am Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kent Johnson" <kent@compx2.com>
| Quote: | Hi Richard.
I regard highly the passage from Promulgation of Universal Peace that
begins
"You must become distinguished for loving humanity, for unity and accor
d,
for love and justice." (I am quoting from memory, actually the memory o
f
those verses to music). I assume they are highly regarded by other
Baha'is
as well since I have heard that passage sung frequently in rounds and
accompanied.
Anyway, some on this forum have been discounting the book that passage
is
found. I see Susan has answered you, but I have not yet read what she
said.
Perhaps you could keep up with this discussion and give me your input t
o |
the
Kent, I understand your yearning for certain passages. There is a narrat
ive
in PUP attibuted to Abdu'l-Baha which discusses the consultation between
the
desciples. When I was remineded, several years ago that PUP is not
authenticated, I was distraught for a few moments. However, having read
the
material about authentic literature requiring a signature or seal several
years before that, I had to accept that decision. When I mentioned the s
ame
to a Baha'i on another list; the believer objected. I could not find the
reference; but Susan did. I have no argument with Susan or Mark on this
because they are following the Covenant. My question to you is why you f
ind
the wish of the Master in this so objectionable. He said:
"Any narrative that is not authenticated by a Text should not be trusted.
Narratives, even if true, cause confusion. For the people of Baha, the Te
xt,
and only the Text, is authentic."
('Abdu'l-Bahá: from a previously untranslated tablet)
When Susan said that she cannot discuss the statement attributed to
Abdu'l-Baha because she does no know what He said; she is absolutely
correct. She was not there when He spoke; and she has no Text.
Richard.
> |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:15 pm Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
How can a message that does not name anyone be personal? I challenge
beliefs, apparently beliefs that you hold dear. There is nothing personal
in that, and that is one of the major points of this thread.
--Kent
"Susan Maneck" <smaneck@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef-dndrEFus5pRfVnZ2dnUVZ_rzinZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: | You have been posting this week, as has Tom and Mark. I am unclear why
you
think I have abused my position while you have not.
Dear Kent,
I posted when Tom could not. When it was determined that Mark would
post this week I stopped posting.
On what issue would the message been rejected?
It contained personal attacks.
It seems to me a lot of telling me why
I am what I am and directly forbidden in the Charter.
It says nothing about 'why you are what you are.' What it does it
explain what you have been doing and why they constitute personal
attacks and harrassment.
Susan
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:47 pm Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
Hi Richard,
"I understand your yearning for certain passages."
I believe the issue is much more than yearning for passages. It is taking
this sentence from the Universal House of Justice:
--------------------------------
" For many of His addresses included in "The Promulgation of Universal
Peace" and "Paris Talks", for example, no original authenticated text has
yet been found."
--------------------------------
And inferring from it that both those entire books hold the "status" of
pilgrims' notes.
It appears you are doing it too, Richard. The myriad reasons I resist so
doing include a yearning for passages, sure. But mainly to show that
'Abdu'l-Baha wanted us to "be Baha'i" and told us precisely how in many
places. For example:
"A man may be a Bahá'í in name only." (Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of
Universal Peace, p. 336) or "Be illumined, be spiritual, be divine, be
glorious, be quickened of God, be a Bahá'í." (Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation
of Universal Peace, p. 453) those are unauthenticated and, apparently,
according to you, dubious as to meaning. And of course "For you I desire
spiritual distinction -- that is, you must become eminent and distinguished
in morals. In the love of God you must become distinguished from all else.
You must become distinguished for loving humanity, for unity and accord, for
love and justice. In brief, you must become distinguished in all the virtues
of the human world -- for faithfulness and sincerity, for justice and
fidelity, for firmness and steadfastness, for philanthropic deeds and
service to the human world, for love toward every human being, for unity and
accord with all people, for removing prejudices and promoting international
peace. Finally, you must become distinguished for heavenly illumination and
for acquiring the bestowals of God. I desire this distinction for you. This
must be the point of distinction among you." (Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation
of Universal Peace, p. 190)
But when He said "Thy letter was received and we note that thou art engaged
in teaching the children of the believers, that these tender little ones
have been learning The Hidden Words and the prayers and what it meaneth to
be a Bahá'í." (Abdu'l-Baha, Selections from the Writings of Abdu'l-Baha, p.
142), now THAT is authenticated and we can use that one to help define what
it means to be a Baha'i.
Can we use those first two passages as an aid to discover the Thoughts of
the Master? Or are they pilgrims' notes?
Let me remind you, the Universal House of Justice said only that for "many"
of the thoughts included in these two large books "no original authenticated
text has yet been found". Does that mean these two passages are two of
those many? No one knows, but you are awfully quick to discount them,
aren't you Richard?
"When I was remineded, several years ago that PUP is not authenticated, I
was distraught for a few moments."
Your distraughtness, in my opinion was misplaced. It came from you not
investigating, believing what you were told and now passing it on to me/
But it was only partially true, Richard. PUP might be, for the most part
very authenticated. We do not know. We only know that for "many" of the
thoughts included in these two large books "no original authenticated text
has yet been found".
Does that mean that there are known errors in those two books? Apparently
not. No one has named one yet. There is no list of which talks are
authenticated and which are not. We have only been given lots of useless
speculation.
"My question to you is why you find the wish of the Master in this so
objectionable."
I can hardly keep from laughing. Here you are telling me to throw away two
books of His thoughts, His wishes for me and for the Baha'i World because He
said "For the people of Baha, the Text, and only the Text, is authentic." in
a previously untranslated tablet. For that one line I can show twenty that
tell us to change our lives, to help our neighbors, to live the life of a
Baha'i, but that isn't the point of the Baha'i Faith, is it Richard?
Apparently the point of the Baha'i Faith is to freeze at whatever spiritual
state we are in the moment we recognize Baha'u'llah, and in our raptured
complacency, wait for others to accept the reasons for our complacency. If
someone becomes aroused and inspired, give them good reasons to stop,
immediately, and be like we are, me and Richard. That is what a Baha'i is.
The rest is just pilgrims' notes.
--Kent
"Richard H. Gravelly" <rgravelly@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:jeWdnS7T-sxFzxfVnZ2dnUVZ_uadnZ2d@giganews.com...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kent Johnson" <kent@compx2.com>
| Quote: | Hi Richard.
I regard highly the passage from Promulgation of Universal Peace that
begins
"You must become distinguished for loving humanity, for unity and accor
d,
for love and justice." (I am quoting from memory, actually the memory o
f
those verses to music). I assume they are highly regarded by other
Baha'is
as well since I have heard that passage sung frequently in rounds and
accompanied.
Anyway, some on this forum have been discounting the book that passage
is
found. I see Susan has answered you, but I have not yet read what she
said.
Perhaps you could keep up with this discussion and give me your input t
o |
the
Kent, I understand your yearning for certain passages. There is a narrat
ive
in PUP attibuted to Abdu'l-Baha which discusses the consultation between
the
desciples. When I was remineded, several years ago that PUP is not
authenticated, I was distraught for a few moments. However, having read
the
material about authentic literature requiring a signature or seal several
years before that, I had to accept that decision. When I mentioned the s
ame
to a Baha'i on another list; the believer objected. I could not find the
reference; but Susan did. I have no argument with Susan or Mark on this
because they are following the Covenant. My question to you is why you f
ind
the wish of the Master in this so objectionable. He said:
"Any narrative that is not authenticated by a Text should not be trusted.
Narratives, even if true, cause confusion. For the people of Baha, the Te
xt,
and only the Text, is authentic."
('Abdu'l-Bahá: from a previously untranslated tablet)
When Susan said that she cannot discuss the statement attributed to
Abdu'l-Baha because she does no know what He said; she is absolutely
correct. She was not there when He spoke; and she has no Text.
Richard.
> |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
tsuki190
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:05 pm Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
No one has suggested that books such as PUP and Paris Talks be discarded.
They probably generally reflect the spirit of Adbul-Baha's remarks accurate
ly.
The problem is that we really don't know where and how they do not reflect
His meaning accurately. So for describing the Baha'i teaching on complex
topics they are not a reliable source. So for reciting the prayers, gettin
g
inspiration, and understanding the great themes of the Baha'i Revelation, m
y
take is that they are fine (as long as they are not contradicted by
authenticated
passages). Can we all agree on that? I think that is generally how Kent w
ants
to use them.
When are they not so useful? Such topics might include evolution, ether, t
he
inerrancy of the Manifestations, the exact nature of the future world
executive,
how the soul originates, ... I would not use these texts in
developing position
papers on such topics until authenticated translations were made available.
I think the important point is to recognize the strengths and the limitatio
ns
of these books. Then we can use them and discuss them without making
mistaken assumptions.
And as others have said there is no place here for accusing anyone of 'robb
ing'
the Baha'i community of these books. That is nonsense.
Note that all of the above is just my opinions.
Cheers,
Tom
| Quote: |
Kent, I understand your yearning for certain passages. There is a narrat
ive
in PUP attibuted to Abdu'l-Baha which discusses the consultation between
the
desciples. When I was remineded, several years ago that PUP is not
authenticated, I was distraught for a few moments. However, having read
the
material about authentic literature requiring a signature or seal several
years before that, I had to accept that decision. When I mentioned the s
ame
to a Baha'i on another list; the believer objected. I could not find the
reference; but Susan did. I have no argument with Susan or Mark on this
because they are following the Covenant. My question to you is why you f
ind
the wish of the Master in this so objectionable. He said:
"Any narrative that is not authenticated by a Text should not be trusted.
Narratives, even if true, cause confusion. For the people of Baha, the Te
xt,
and only the Text, is authentic."
('Abdu'l-Bahá: from a previously untranslated tablet)
When Susan said that she cannot discuss the statement attributed to
Abdu'l-Baha because she does no know what He said; she is absolutely
correct. She was not there when He spoke; and she has no Text.
Richard.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:47 am Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
Hi Tom,
Thank you for the first response to this mess that seems "probably
generally" reasonable to me.
"They probably generally reflect the spirit of Abdul-Baha's remarks
accurately."
If they don't reflect the spirit of 'Abdu'l-Baha's remarks accurately who
the heck would want to be a Baha'i?
I mean, those books are such a treasure of wisdom, of Baha'i ideals and
Baha'i ideas and Baha'i knowledge, if we can't find the Baha'i Faith in
those books what do we need the Baha'i Faith for anyway? If it is there,
then it is here, in my heart, in the faith of all of *all* religions who
believe in virtue, love, spirituality, prayer, charity, perfection, God and
His messengers. If we have to be cautious about whether this is the Baha'i
Faith or not, well, then I don't think I want to be a Baha'i. It is clearly
and truly the inspiration that I seek there in those books, and in other
Writings and in the hearts of many people some of whom aren't even declared
Baha'is.
Imagine that! Kent can find God in non-Baha'i people and books, including
pilgrims' notes, despite the best efforts of everyone here who is still
awake.
My faith is not "scriptural" in Mark's sense of the word. My faith is
inspirational as 'Abdu'l-Baha inspires in talks that "probably generally"
Tom respects to some extent as well.
If we can't get off our high horses and say, yes, this is inspirational,
this is good, this is from God, this is true for us our lives and we know it
when we see it in, golly, the talks of 'Abdu'l-Baha!
Then are we going to recognize Him when we are called to account?
And yeah, I still find it offensive that you can "probably generally" agree
that 'Abdu'l-Baha said something close to what is in those books. I find it
offensive that my fellow Baha'is can't see His wisdom and feel His love and
His care for us, and know what He wants for us without some stamp of
approval from a higher office that says, yeah, that is from Him. I know it
is from Him as well as I know God.
"And as others have said there is no place here for accusing anyone of
'robbing' the Baha'i community of these books"
Putting them into question when the wisdom and inspiration they hold is so
valuable, yeah, it irritates me. If you have a problem with something that
is said, that is the time to question, not when you hear the source is PUP
(ahem, well, its probably generally okay then), but when you hear what is
said, what is given us, what He wants of us.
Doubt it if you want, but I won't.
--Kent
"tsuki190" <tsuki190@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:rsednW3bZZp-9BbVnZ2dnUVZ_r3inZ2d@giganews.com...
No one has suggested that books such as PUP and Paris Talks be discarded.
They probably generally reflect the spirit of Adbul-Baha's remarks accurate
ly.
The problem is that we really don't know where and how they do not reflect
His meaning accurately. So for describing the Baha'i teaching on complex
topics they are not a reliable source. So for reciting the prayers, gettin
g
inspiration, and understanding the great themes of the Baha'i Revelation, m
y
take is that they are fine (as long as they are not contradicted by
authenticated
passages). Can we all agree on that? I think that is generally how Kent w
ants
to use them.
When are they not so useful? Such topics might include evolution, ether, t
he
inerrancy of the Manifestations, the exact nature of the future world
executive,
how the soul originates, ... I would not use these texts in
developing position
papers on such topics until authenticated translations were made available.
I think the important point is to recognize the strengths and the limitatio
ns
of these books. Then we can use them and discuss them without making
mistaken assumptions.
And as others have said there is no place here for accusing anyone of 'robb
ing'
the Baha'i community of these books. That is nonsense.
Note that all of the above is just my opinions.
Cheers,
Tom
| Quote: |
Kent, I understand your yearning for certain passages. There is a narrat
ive
in PUP attibuted to Abdu'l-Baha which discusses the consultation between
the
desciples. When I was remineded, several years ago that PUP is not
authenticated, I was distraught for a few moments. However, having read
the
material about authentic literature requiring a signature or seal several
years before that, I had to accept that decision. When I mentioned the s
ame
to a Baha'i on another list; the believer objected. I could not find the
reference; but Susan did. I have no argument with Susan or Mark on this
because they are following the Covenant. My question to you is why you f
ind
the wish of the Master in this so objectionable. He said:
"Any narrative that is not authenticated by a Text should not be trusted.
Narratives, even if true, cause confusion. For the people of Baha, the Te
xt,
and only the Text, is authentic."
('Abdu'l-Bahá: from a previously untranslated tablet)
When Susan said that she cannot discuss the statement attributed to
Abdu'l-Baha because she does no know what He said; she is absolutely
correct. She was not there when He spoke; and she has no Text.
Richard.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Susan Maneck
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 5:02 am Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
| Quote: | I mean, those books are such a treasure of wisdom, of Baha'i ideals and
Baha'i ideas and Baha'i knowledge, if we can't find the Baha'i Faith in
those books what do we need the Baha'i Faith for anyway?
|
Dear Kent,
This may come as a shock to you but we also have the authoritative
Writings. Some people are even inspired by them!
| Quote: | Imagine that! Kent can find God in non-Baha'i people and books, including
pilgrims' notes, despite the best efforts of everyone here who is still
awake.
|
It only in Kent's imagination that anyone has ever had a problem with that.
| Quote: | If we can't get off our high horses
|
If we can avoid accusing our fellow believers of being on their 'high
horses' we might be able to engage in productive consultation.
| Quote: | And yeah, I still find it offensive that you can "probably generally" agree
that 'Abdu'l-Baha said something close to what is in those books. I find it
offensive that my fellow Baha'is can't see His wisdom and feel His love and
His care for us, and know what He wants for us without some stamp of
approval from a higher office that says, yeah, that is from Him. I
|
And you can't see where you are getting personal, huh? Well, let me
get personal along the same vein. I find it offensive that you put
yourself up on this high horse and decide where your fellow believers
should see Abdu'l-Baha's loving care for us.
| Quote: | If you have a problem with something that
is said, that is the time to question,
|
Accusing people of 'robbing the community' is not the same as questioning.
Susan |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 5:05 pm Post subject: Re: The belief, not the person |
|
|
Hi Susan,
It seems you are saying that when 'Abdu'l-Baha says in various places in
various words in PUP or Paris Talks "Be a Baha'i" you discount that
statement to some extent, do you not?
Is there something wrong with the statement? Is there something of
'Abdu'l-Baha that you find lacking in those passages that I have oft-quoted
here? Do you believe we should or should not be inspired by those words?
| Quote: | ...we also have the authoritative
Writings.
|
So we should discount those that may not be authenticated until some future
date?
| Quote: | If we can avoid accusing our fellow believers of being on their 'high
horses' we might be able to engage in productive consultation.
|
I said us, as Baha'is, on our high horses. And according to my definition
of personal it is directed to a person. Shall we revise that definition?
You know I prefer to talk about what we believe than what we say, so if you
could clarify your comments to address the issues we are talking about I
would appreciate it.
| Quote: | Accusing people of 'robbing the community' is not the same as questioning.
|
I was speaking about questioning the authenticity of PUP and Paris Talks.
It is when there is disagreement with the meaning of a passage that it
should be questioned, authentication sought. Not when the books are
referred to in a general manner should we immediately scream "pilgrims'
notes". I think from your recent comments you have come to agree with me on
that point.
But specifically we are talking about who 'Abdu'l-Baha asked to be Baha'i,
and that is the issue I would like to address. If I start a thread with
that name, will that be too personal?
--Kent
"Susan Maneck" <smaneck@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7q6dnXZTv96OIBbVnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
| Quote: | I mean, those books are such a treasure of wisdom, of Baha'i ideals and
Baha'i ideas and Baha'i knowledge, if we can't find the Baha'i Faith in
those books what do we need the Baha'i Faith for anyway?
Dear Kent,
This may come as a shock to you but we also have the authoritative
Writings. Some people are even inspired by them!
Imagine that! Kent can find God in non-Baha'i people and books,
including
pilgrims' notes, despite the best efforts of everyone here who is still
awake.
It only in Kent's imagination that anyone has ever had a problem with
that.
If we can't get off our high horses
If we can avoid accusing our fellow believers of being on their 'high
horses' we might be able to engage in productive consultation.
And yeah, I still find it offensive that you can "probably generally"
agree
that 'Abdu'l-Baha said something close to what is in those books. I find
it
offensive that my fellow Baha'is can't see His wisdom and feel His love
and
His care for us, and know what He wants for us without some stamp of
approval from a higher office that says, yeah, that is from Him. I
And you can't see where you are getting personal, huh? Well, let me
get personal along the same vein. I find it offensive that you put
yourself up on this high horse and decide where your fellow believers
should see Abdu'l-Baha's loving care for us.
If you have a problem with something that
is said, that is the time to question,
Accusing people of 'robbing the community' is not the same as questioning.
Susan
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
