| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 4:34 pm Post subject: Writings? Is or Is Not? |
 |
|
This issue is not just silly. It is an indictment of the Baha'i "community"
which is no community at all. If I am right, if we can look at this issue
dispassionately, with fairness, we will clearly see the partisanship, the
exclusivism, the legalistic mindset that has replaced community, if we ever
had a community.
Here is an example of how decisions are made, positions are carried, ideas
are adopted not based upon whether or not they make sense, but on whom we
want to impress or side with. Any objective look at the ostensible issue
"What Is a Writing?" would consider fairly what people generally call "the
Baha'i Writings" and start there. But not our community. What I want the
reader to consider is Why Not?
Two very common and well known Baha'i books are apparently, according
everyone but me on this list, not "Baha'i Writings". Some say they are
"notes" another says only the Universal House of Justice can say what is or
isn't a "Baha'i Writing". I think it has less to do with common sense than
politics who believes what. I think we cannot even reasonably guess who
would take which position based on the position itself, but only that
everyone wishes to oppose my position on the matter and it therefore their
positions become more and more ridiculous because they are not considering
fairly, but rather according to their partisan "Baha'i" positions.
I urge everyone reading to consider fairly, dispassionately, with justice in
our hearts, why such positions are taken and defended so furiously.
Mark recently said: "Writings, or Scripture (its synonym), would imply to me
that the text was originally written, or dictated to an amanuensis, for the
purpose of being read." Seems reasonable, but any commonly held idea of
scripture before the Qur'an was definitely not originally "written ... for
the purpose of being read" unless we consider that anything written is
written be read later. But certainly, the Gospels of Christianity were
talks originally, recited, and not written for hundreds of years after their
creation.
The works of Plato are not writings or books, since they are ostensibly
transcribed talks. Some Answered Questions would not be part of the Baha'i
Writings, and neither is the Dawnbreakers, unless we take the generalist
view that, jeepers, of COURSE they are Writings, because everyone calls them
"The Baha'i Writings".
Perhaps we should ask the Universal House of Justice, as another contributor
suggests.
--Kent
[Mod: I think we have had enough on this topic and can close it. The last sentence above is a good conclusion so I will not be approving any further messages on this while I am moderating. Tom] |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Susan
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 2:50 pm Post subject: Re: Writings? Is or Is Not? |
|
|
On Aug 8, 7:01 am, "Kent Johnson" <k...@compx2.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Apparently Tom, according to your note at the bottom as moderator, you
believe this issue is a cause of contention in the Baha'i Community.
Further, that stopping discussion on the topic will somehow help that
situation.
|
Apparently I accidentally posted this message, but this thread is
closed.
| Quote: |
Moreover, you believe that asking the Universal House of Justice what
constitutes "Baha'i Writings" is a solution to this contention.
|
That was the suggestion you made in your own post. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Kent Johnson
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 5:01 pm Post subject: Re: Writings? Is or Is Not? |
|
|
Apparently Tom, according to your note at the bottom as moderator, you
believe this issue is a cause of contention in the Baha'i Community.
Further, that stopping discussion on the topic will somehow help that
situation.
Moreover, you believe that asking the Universal House of Justice what
constitutes "Baha'i Writings" is a solution to this contention.
I disagree on all counts, and hardly know where to begin. So let me just
point out that in every list of "Baha'i Writings" I have ever seen Paris
Talks and Promulgation of Universal Peace are included. The hoops we must
jump through to exclude them sap my energy.
If talking about this issue is cause of contention in the Baha'i community
then I am the cause of this contention. In order to alleviate the
situation, I suggest that we request the lists that include these works,
which include many talks that were unauthenticated in the 1980s, be removed
from the following lists:
http://bahai-library.com (calls the challenged books "Scripture" as well as
"Baha'i Writings")
http://www.bahai-education.org/ocean/ (calls the books "authoritative
'Abdu'l-Baha")
http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/ ("The Works of 'Abdu'l-Baha")
To be clear, my opinion is this will do nothing to help with the contention
on this topic or any topic on the SRB. The only thing that will help with
the contention, in my opinion, is careful consideration of others, their
viewpoints, and respect for their views.
I suggest we start here. If you can believe this is posting is about the
issue, that simply everyone calls the books "Baha'i Writings", and talking
to the Universal House of Justice about it won't help, then post it.
If not, then please get back to me and tell me what it is really about,
because that is what I want to know.
--Kent |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
