On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 16:11:52 -0800 (PST), louise mchenry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Gilberto, > > thanks for your response. Food for thought and a challenge to make my > understanding and thoughts more clear. >
Glad to oblige. > > My question was: how can religion by itself do this? [reform and change] > > Suppose that a Bahai country interprets the Bahai writings to say that an > > arsonist should be burned. So this country makes a law whereby the > > punishment of arson is burning, no matter what was set on fire, a car, an > > empty warehouse, a house full of people. > > > In the Bahai faith, as soon as the UHJ becomes aware of a country where > the > > code of law was influenced by the Bahai laws, I am sure the UHJ would say > to > > this country they are implementing that law too strictly and too narrowly. > > gilberto: I wouldn't automatically assume that but that's ok. > Janine: I assume that because Baha'u'llah says that it is also okay to > change the sentence of burning an arsonist to life sentence. And the UHJ has > said that there is a difference between a school full of children being set > on fire or an empty warehouse. Gilberto: Ok. That makes more sense then if there actually is a specific statement on the application of this law from the UHJ. But still, this Bahai country would at some point burn at least one person alive I would think. And when it does, people might be outraged. > L: > > A religion who has no authority centre cannot do this. A religion needs an > > administrative structure to be able to guide people back to the core. G: > I think that isn't true. Religions with decentralized authority can > still change in response to new situations. It might happen slowly or > unevenly but that's actually ok with me. Besides, even in Islam there > are still mid-level national and international organizations and > associations that can mobilize large numbers of people. So some kinds > of coordination can happen that way.. > Janine: I can see that as a possibility. It is a good argument. > Gilberto: But I would actually be very > mistrustful of a centralized authority which claimed to be infallible L: > I would be so as well, unless it was said by someone who I think is speaking > with God's authority. Baha'u'llah is someone Who has that authority, for me, G: Yes, alot of these arguments really do just boil down to that point. If you believe the Bahai claims about Bahaullah then everything else follows. If you don't start at that point, it is hard to imagine being convinced based on argumentation. > Gilberto: Another aspect to how a religion can be brought back to its core > is > through reformers. It is actually a prophecy of Muhammad, that in > every century (Islamic) a reformer will arise who will revive the > community's understanding of the religion. So powerful figures do rise > up, get recongized, and reenergize the community. > Janine: but how do you discern who is a reformer who has the goodwill and > approval of Allah? From where I am standing, reformers in religions always > lead to more divisions, more fractions be formed, more offficial schools of > thought established which then led to schisms. Gilberto: In Christian history Luther and Calvin and the other "reformers" led to certain divisions and ultimately split Christendom in radical ways. In terms of Islam, Abdul Wahab claimed to try to reform Islam, and in certain respects probably wounded the unity of Islam. But at the same time, Islam still has a strong focus on unity and so Wahabis don't want to declare themselves a schism. They would just consider themselves a movement within sunni Islam. I think there are more movements and schools of thought then there are actual schisms. So for the most part, a "reviver" comes along and people either like that person or not. But at the end of the day they would still be willing to pray together at the same mosque. [Another example. The Black civil rights movement in the US reformed the US churches. In order for that process of change to occur, it didn't require Martin Luther King to become pope.] > > Janine: but how was it possible that the civil rights movement did get so > much support, that it spoke to so many people, at that particular time? Was > it not because peoples' awareness and understanding had grown? Gilberto: Sure. And that's a process which occured in a decentralized way, through multiple organizations. L: > As I understand it, Martin Luther King was not the only one who advocated > racial unity. Gilberto: Of course It was a mass effort.. L: > Martin King had a following, yes. And in my view that made him a > priest, just like Ghandi. G:I wouldn't call either of them priests. I suspect that if you have a definition of priest which is big enough to include them, it can't be narrow enough to exclude Bahais. > > Islam is a very fair religion. My problem is though that in many Islamic > > communities there is a lot of cultural burden put on the practice of Islam > > and that many Muslims may know the Qur'an by heart but only in a tongue > > which they do not speak and so never really know what they are saying, > > leaving it to others to interpret the Qur'an for them. > > Gilberto: It is kind of odd to say that when the Bahai texts were also > originally in Arabic and Persian and much of the writings are still > untranslated. In the case of Islam, there are many translations of the > Quran available, and all the major sunni collections have been > translated. And an immense amount of other Islamic literature (both > early and modern) has been translated. > Yes, the bahai writings have been translated. Gilberto: I thought that alot of materials were still untranslated. > Bahais are strongly adviced to > learn Persian and Arabic to be able to read them in the original language. > Something I have not done yet. L:> > I would have a different opinion about this matter were it not that I have > had contact with many muslims from both Turkish and North African origin who > can quote the whole of the Qur'an in the purest Arabic but do not know half > of the time what they are saying. Gilberto: I think that in every religion, for each individual there is alot which is understood, and alot which remains to yet be understood. L: > So what I read in the > > Qur'an is not at all practiced in many countries, especially not in the > > countries where Islam was born. And like Christianity before it (in Africa > > for example) cultural practices which do not really have much to do with > > Islam are taken over by those who become Muslim. Gilberto: I think religion always overlaps with religion. I would be surprised if the way you practice the Bahai faith were the same in every detail to the way a Persian Bahai practices the Bahai faith. Your culture comes through. And I'm not sure which African practices you had in mind, but from a certain perspective the Middle East is more culturally connected to Africa than many other places in the world. There is a relatively recent book called "Black God: The Afroasiatic Roots of the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Religions" by Julian Baldick which discusses some of these connections. L: > I think Islam is a very fair and just > religion, but my problem is that I do not see that practiced en masse, > especially not in the countries in the area where the Prophet lived and > walked and its immediate surroundings. G: If that's the case then Muslim countries should try harder to follow the best understanding of Islamic principles. [..] > Gilberto: The Bahai attitude is actually really interesting to me because > the > closest thing in Islam to priests are scholars. Which in Arabic are > called ulema, and it literally means "those who know". But then the > funny aspect is that the Bahai faith does have an institution of "the > Learned" which probably would be "ulema" in Arabic as well. > > Yes. There are two branches, which are equally important, in the > Adminstrative Order as laid out by Baha'u'llah. Gilberto: Yes, but then they seem more "priest-like" to me than anything in sunni Islam. . J: What bothers me is that in no religion > that I know of but the Bahai faith there is a structure in place which > prevents leaders from becoming very very influential to the point that > authority lies with one person only and that one person is able to influence > the laws of a country, in effect. Gilberto: It seems like you are assuming all Muslims or maybe even anyone who isn't Bahai is some weak-minded idiot just waiting to be hypnotized by the first person to walk up to them wearing a funny hat. "Leaders" appear and make claims. But they have to be persuasive. They have to make arguments. They have to be able to answer questions. They get criticized, held up to scrutiny. People vote with their feet. Janine: No. you read me wrong if you conclude that. Even Bahais are prone to follow a person. [...] > In my view, humanity nowadays is shedding slowly off the habit of looking > for leaders and following them mindlessly. J: > The Bahai faith is the only religion I know which so often reminds > people not to follow in the footsteps of others blindly, to use your own > power to discover truth for yourself. The Quran does this alot as well. > But I think that this thinking for > yourself is a growing thing, although at the same time we see the rise of > fundamentalism. The so-called fundamentalists ARE the ones who are most emphasizing individual interpretation. What I would call the ideological landscape of ISlam is actually very non-intuitive. Even as a Muslim for serveral years I didn't have the same conception of it that I do today. Traditional classical Islam is the more tolerant interpretation. It says to be patient with your leaders. It says to give other Muslims the benefit of the doubt. It's the individualists who throw off traditional scholarship who are the extremists. > Janine: > All the Islamic countries I know of put restrictions on what women can't and > can do, what role they can play in society, and that role is usually one > subservient to men. Gilberto: I think you are looking at this ahistorically. All over the world, the position of women in society has at various times, to varying degrees been subservient to ment. And both in the West and in the Islamic world things have been worse than they are now, things have improved in certain respects. And in both the West and the Islamic world there continues to be room for improvement. And what I would say is that the position of women in the Muslim world can improve while being faithful to Islam. J > I also believe that some of the social teachings of Islam, like the one on > waging war, or at least how that is interpreted, are outdated, just like > the fatwah. "Fatwa" doesn't mean "death threat" A "fatwa" is just a legal ruling. So when the United States Supreme Court issues a decision, that's the equivalent of a "fatwa". It is a common mistake and its sort of understandable but to me its just another example of how even when people are ignorant about certain Islamic concepts, they will often give things the worst possible interpretation. I don't think its a personal problem of yours as much as it is a sign that Muslims have a deep PR problem. And even when Muslims try to spend alot of time trying to explain things, at the end of the day people will believe what they want to believe. Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __________________________________________________ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
