RE: Scope of the House of Justice
Dear Tim, --- Tim Nolan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If any definitive answer to this is possible, only the House of Justice itself can give it. Anything we say is speculation. So, why don't you ask the House? For several reasons, I think it's premature to write to the House: 1. In this case, the question is not clear to me. If you've noticed, I've thrown out several theories, some of which have nicely been knocked down by folks here, while I'm still chewing over other pieces. 2. When a question like this is put to the House of Justice, they'll turn around and have the Research Dept spend weeks digging up all the relevant texts, analyze them, write memos, etc, and generally the House ends up forwarding the Research Dept's final memo. I think we can do some of that leg work here by a systematic study of the texts on the subject and that way either avoid writing them altogether, or write them with a narrow, refined question. And most importantly, I think the *process* is far more important than the answer. Off and on, I've been on line for 9 years now and seldom do I see Baha'i scholars get along or actually solve anything. Often we (and many of those we is me!) end up in an argument and consultation breaks down. We have to learn to talk with each other and solve actual problems. This will come with passage of time, a lot of patience and a lot of practice. At the risk of public embarrassment, I point to Brent as an example of a Baha'i scholar who has shown enormous patience, good humor, mature judgment, and generally as someone who is a positive factor in such on-line consultations. When I grow up, I want to be like him ;-} Anyway, you asked a simple question and I gave a long-winded response. Sorry. Regards, Ahang. __ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice -VERY LONG
In The thirteenth Glad-Tidings and The eighth Ishraq, Baha'u'llah refers to The MEN of God's House of Justice as the Trustees of God. Dear Sandra, Keep in mind that originally Abdu'l-Baha applied this passage when asked why women were excluded from the Chicago House of Justice. It was later He restricted its application to the Universal House of Justice. In the Aqdas, referencing previous epistles Baha'u'llah enjoins upon the Trustees of the House of Justice either to choose one language from among those now existing or to adopt a new one ... I'll grant you that this is likely to be a function of the Universal House of Justice alone. In Tablets of Baha'u'llah, while reiterating earlier passages in the Aqdas and other Tablets; Baha'u'llah said: ...all affairs are committed to the care of just kings and presidents and of the Trustees of the House of Justice. As kings and presidents are equated with the Trustees, it leaves little doubt in my mind that He intends the *Universal* House of Justice and not any of the Local Spiritual Assemblies or future Local Houses of Justice. But why wouldn't it apply to Secondary Houses of Justice? And, again from Tablets of Baha'u'llah, He said: ...the Trustees are then to take from him that which is required for their instruction, if he be wealthy, and if not the matter devolveth upon the House of Justice. [for the education of children] Again, the education of children may well have roots in the local community - however, this statement speaks to taxation. So why wouldn't local Houses of Justice be in charge of taxation? Abdu'l-Baha seems to place them in charge of the local storehouses. Also, in Tablets, the Trustees of God's House of Justice are again paired with the chiefs and rulers of the world... not likely Baha'u'llah is referring to Local Houses of Justice there. Again, there are all kinds of levels of Houses of Justice. And they are all considered 'rulers in Baha. In God Passes By, Shoghi Effendi states that in the Aqdas, Baha'u'llah: ordains the institution of the House of Justice, defines its functions, fixes its revenues, and designates its members as the Men of Justice, the Deputies of God, the Trustees of the All-Merciful ... And indeed He does! [page 26 And elsewhere the term 'Trustees of the all-Mericful applied to lesser institutions as well. With regard to the Iqan quote: Ultimately, the Local and National Assemblies must rely on the Universal House of Justice *expound meanings*, and *unravel mystery* and, it's been established that Baha'u'llah designated ...the men of God's House of Justice as the Trustees of God. Sandra, that the function of the Authoritative Interpreters and the Manifestations not the Universal House of Justice. I believe in most if not all the quotes I gave, the words *Trustees* or *House of Justice* or *Universal House of Justice* are all in combination with a personal pronoun - making the title or designation - *specific* to one/singular institution. Huh? What personal pronouns are you talking about? It's been a long time since I've had any formal education in English. I'm open to correction if I'm wrong. I don't see him adopting a convention of capitalizing references to the Universal House of Justice. Can you provide a sentence from any of the Guardian's writings or translations where he did NOT capitalize Universal House of Justice ? I'm still looking for one... I said *references* to the Universal House of Justice, not the name Universal House of Justice which is capitalized by virtue of being a proper name. But so are Houses of Justice generically. warmest, Susan __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
No, but I think they are, at least in some instances, *applications* of the Guardian's interpretations to current events. In other words, some interpretations given by Shoghi Effendi may have been "pure" (given just for their own sakes) and others may have been "applied." Is there a scientific way to distinguish between the two, pure and applied? If the Guardian's discussion of, say, racism as the most challenging issue in the U.S., was a temporal application of his interpretive function, then it will lose its significance over time, and future "applied interpretations" will be impossible.It give the Baha'is an opportunity to interpret the Written Holy Text for themselves, and various personal interpretations would exist. Kind of like the two camps of Baha'is, both regarded as valid by Baha'u'llah, one considering Baha'u'llah to be Divine and the other only a man. The beauty of this is that, people holding these two views exist in 1 community, united, because due to the definition of 'Manifestation of God', these two views in fact point to the same reality, and from either perspective, the Will of God is handed down to the people. I can see this applying to the above (somehow :-) ). Unlike other organizations, differences of this nature caused them to split into two separa! te camps. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
Is there a scientific way to distinguish between the two, pure and applied? If you mean a reasonable or systematic way to distinguish between them, I don't think that it is difficult to distinguish between them. What I called applied interpretations clearly refer either to either a specific time period or a particular individual or set of individuals. If the circumstances change (as with the end of the Soviet Union referred to by the Guardian in _Citadel of Faith_), the interpretation may no longer be relevant. As I see it, the difficulty is not in distinguishing between pure and applied interpretations. It is determining whether, with respect to the Guardian's suggestions to individuals, a particular statement was an applied interpretation (assuming some of them could be classified as such) or only the Guardian's personal opinion. In any event, the Guardian indicated that these suggestions are not binding. Unlike other organizations, differences of this nature caused them to split into two separate camps. Yes. In that respect, I think that the absence of a living authoritative interpreter is a call to individual and community responsibility and an invitation to greater polydoxy. IMO, Ruhi may represent an abandonment, hopefully temporary, of that responsibility. Regards, Mark A. Foster http://markfoster.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger. Abbie Hoffman __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
In a message dated 2/1/2005 8:19:46 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 2/1/2005 12:21:19 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Where else would the Guardian have found to consult on the future of the Guardianship?" The Hands of the Cause of God. I do not think the Hands were appointed for that purpose. The House of Justice WOULD be appointed for the purpose of consultation. The Hands were servants of the Will of the Central Figures of the Faith. Regards, Scott __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
I do not think the Hands were appointed for that purpose. The House of Justice WOULD be appointed for the purpose of consultation. The Hands were servants of the Will of the Central Figures of the Faith. Dear Scott, The House of Justice is elected for the purpose of legislation. *All* our our administrative institutions are expected to consult. Were this not true of the Hands as well, Abdu'l-Baha would not have mentioned the Hands electing nine of them from among their own numbers to validate the choice of the next Guardian. warmest, Susan __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
In a message dated 2/1/2005 9:23:35 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dear Scott,The House of Justice is elected for the purpose of legislation. *All* ourour administrative institutions are expected to consult. Were this not trueof the Hands as well, Abdu'l-Baha would not have mentioned the Handselecting nine of them from among their own numbers to validate the choice ofthe next Guardian.warmest, Susan We are, of course, dealing with conjecture. The Hands did serve admirably and came up with the best solution to the problem. But the problem caused a major bump in the road for the Cause. True such bumps serve to re-define dedication in all the friends, and it is easy to see this over and over as time went on. However, if SHoghi Effendi had lived past the formation of the institution of the House, the bump could have been avoided, I believe. But it is conjecture here, only conjecture and one wonders why Shoghi Effendi did not see fit to discuss this with the Hands. I hardly think that if he had formulated some kind of plan the place to do it would have been within the supreme institutions of Guardian and House. Regards, Scott __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
Hi, Susan, At 09:12 AM 2/1/2005, you wrote: As one of the Counsellors explained to me, the purpose of Ruhi is not to impose a particular orthodoxy. They didn't come up with a set a of beliefs they wanted everyone to adhere to and then look for the quotes to match. RAther they came up with what it is they wanted the friends to *do* and came up with passages that would serve that purpose. Yes, I know they say that was the purpose. However, the best made plans ... Regards, Mark A. Foster http://markfoster.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger. Abbie Hoffman __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
Brent: In like manner, though the subject of Paragraph 42 of the Aqdas is the wakf, the endowments dedicated to charity, the contents have reference to the institution of the Guardianship, and to the all-important matter of the succession after the Manifestation. Dear Brent, I cannot see what the reference here to Guardianship is? Do you have the exact quote of Guardian or the House about K42? Regarding K42, as far as I understand in Islamic Law, waqf is a permanent charitable endowment. A property when set aside for waqf is said to be owned by God in Islamic Law and is exempt from taxation and it cannot be sold. It is very similar to an earmarked fund for a given purpose. A property which has been set aside for waqf usually has its management team (naazir) which is usually the male descendants of the original founder. But if the family line of the naazir die out or the beneficiary for which the waqf was founded ceases to exist then the question is who gets the waqf and manages its income. In Ottoman Empire at the time of Baha'u'llah State could seize such properties. I think K42 is answering the question of waqf when it has lost their beneficiaries. This verse does not say that all awqaaf automatically fall under Aghsan (or now the House of Justice). The House of Justice in this verse may as well mean houses of justice, as the word in Arabic is bilaad which means lands or cities which has been translated its authority in the world. So it may mean that the local spiritual assembly who has authority over that city control awqaaf of that city when beneficiaries ceased to exist. That's all I understand about this K42 of the Most Holy Book. I cannot see any reference to Guardianship or He being infallible (no matter what it means). By saying this I am not saying that the Institution of Guardianship is a wrong institution, God forbids. I do believe in Master after Baha'u'llah and His interpretation of Baha'i Writings being infallible. Again I would like to emphasize that I am not undermining the authority of the Guardian by saying that I see no reference to Institution of Guardianship in K42. Regards, Firouz __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
Susan: That strikes me as as big a leap as reading the Guardianship into that passage. My point is not so much that the verse points toa Guardian as that itestablishes that the Universal House of Justice can exist without one. Dear Susan, My understanding from Baha'u'llah's Writings is that Universal House of Justice will be established without a Guardian. I have not seen any Writing from Baha'u'llah to indicate that one of the Aghsan should be a member of the House of Justice or any other relationship between Aghsan and the House. regards, Firouz __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
I don't think Baha'u'llah says anything explicitly on this matter whatsoever. However, the particular passage in question most definitely presumes that a House can operate without an Aghsan. While technically your last sentence is correct, the fact remains that Baha'u'llah did not say anything whatsoever about the Guardianship. The addition of Guardian to the House of Justice was Abdu'l-Baha's innovation. When Abdu'l-Baha expanded this membership to include the Guardian of the Cause, He also expanded the scope of the House of Justice to include such things as ruling on things that cause differences, etc. As I stated earlier, the definition of the scope of the Universal House of Justice has evolved over time, and therefore it is important to examine the Texts related to this august institution in light of the scope that was intended by the Writer of that specific passage (as oppose to trying to relate them all to the present House of Justice). Regards, Ahang. __ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
I thought this too, until someone suggested to me that the guidance of the first Guardian as laid down in numerous letters could be seen as that there is still a Guardian, and that the Universal House of Justice consults with the Guardian when they consult his letters. Whoever suggested this to you needs to think a bit further down the road. There are a whole range of issues that confront us today that were not even known in 1957 or earlier, and have no expressions in the writings associated with the period of the Guardianship. This will only get more complex as years go by and we get further away from the society of 1950's. Therefore to suggest that we can find the answers to all the present and future issues in the writings of Shoghi Effendi is too unrealistic. Abdu'l-Baha was perfectly aware of that which is why He called for a continual line of Guardianship. Otherwise, He would have said only one Guardian will do. So we have lost something with termination of the Guardianship. That loss must be acknowledged and factored into our analysis. Regards, Ahang. __ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
Endowments dedicated to charity revert to God, the Revealer of Signs. None hath the right to dispose of them without leave from Him Who is the Dawning-place of Revelation. This passage of the Kitab Aqdas is clear. Even manner of disposition of the House of the Bab in Shiraz, which was specifically left by the Bab to His widow Khadjih Bagum was brought before Baha'u'llah for decision. After Him, this authority shall pass to the Aghsan, and after them to the House of Justice--should it be established in the world by then--that they may use these endowments for the benefit of the Places which have been exalted in this Cause, and for whatsoever hath been enjoined upon them by Him Who is the God of might and power. There are two different ways to read this passage: Chronological and hierarchal. Chronologically, it suggests that waqf properties will be administered by the Aghsan (i.e. Abdu'l-Baha and His successors) and then by the House of Justice. In a hierarchical reading, it would suggest that the primary decision about disposition of the waqf resides with the Aghsan, but the House of Justice, when formed, has a role in execution of this decision. That is, it could be understood that the House of Justice, when formed, would assist Abdu'l-Baha in execution of decisions He made regarding waqf properties. Incidentally, I'm not suggesting that the second reading is necessarily more accurate, just another possibility. Otherwise, the endowments shall revert to the people of who speak not except by His leave and judge not save in accordance with what God hath decreed in this Tablet--lo, they are the champions of victory betwixt heaven and earth--that they may use them in the manner that hath been laid down in the Book by God, the Mighty, the Bountiful. Now this is the part I don't understand. Since Baha'u'llah has already mentioned the Aghsan and the House of Justice, then who has He in mind in this passage? Note the transition word: Otherwise! Regards, Ahang. __ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
Personally, I don't think that the concept of not *mutilating* the World Order of Baha'u'llah is directly connected with the House focusing on Shoghi Effendi's interpretations. Rather, consulting those interpretations, when applicable, is one of the *implications* of avoiding such mutilation. IMHO, it is more accurate to say that the Guardian performed, in his interpretative magisterium, whatever duties were enjoined upon him by `Abdu'l-Baha from 1921-1957, and that, beginning in 1963, the Universal House of Justice, by reading the Baha'i Sacred Texts and the writings, and letters written on behalf, of the Guardian, is doing something similar for its own legislative magisterium. It seems likely that, in numerous respects, aspects of Shoghi Effendi's work will become less relevant as time goes on. For instance, in the mid-20th century, he suggested that racism (racialism) was the most challenging issue facing Americans. However, in the early 21st century, one might argue that classism has replaced it. Similarly, I doubt that, if he were writing today, he would single out communism as one of the three false gods. The importance of the Guardianship, as I see it, can be seen principally in the services Shoghi Effendi performed for the Baha'i Cause during his own lifetime. One of those services was further defining the spheres of operation of the Universal House of Justice. I think it would be a stretch, however, to say that the Guardianship continues through the materials which he and his secretaries wrote. Certainly, his interpretations, etc. are a part of his legacy, and the House of Justice will presumably continue to rely upon them when appropriate. However, I don't think that this practice is directly related to avoiding the mutilation discussed by the Guardian. In other words, the non-mutilation is simply a consequence of the establishment of those two divine institutions, at different points in time (as it turned out), and a function of the services each have performed. Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship the World Order of Baha'u'llah would be mutilated and permanently deprived of that hereditary principle which, as Abdu'l-Baha has written, has been invariably upheld by the Law of God. 'In all the Divine Dispensations,' He states, in a Tablet addressed to a follower of the Faith in Persia, 'the eldest son hath been given extraordinary distinctions. Even the station of prophethood hath been his birthright.' Without such an institution the integrity of the Faith would be imperiled, and the stability of the entire fabric would be gravely endangered. Its prestige would suffer, the means required to enable it to take a long, an uninterrupted view over a series of generations would be completely lacking, and the necessary guidance to define the sphere of the legislative action of its elected representatives would be totally withdrawn. Severed from the no less essential institution of the Universal House of Justice this same System of the Will of Abdu'l-Baha would be paralyzed in its action and would be powerless to fill in those gaps which the Author of the Kitab-i-Aqdas has deliberately left in the body of His legislative and administrative ordinances. -- Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Baha'u'llah, p.148 Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. http://markfoster.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger. --- Abbie Hoffman __ 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
re: Scope of the House of Justice
Ahang: Yes, but exact same thing is stated in regard to all Spiritual Assemblies. That is, in consultation, they are all recipient of Divine Guidance. Dear Ahang, Are there prerequisites outlined for the Universal House of Justice that enables them to be recipients of Divine Guidance as it is with Local Spiritual Assemblies? See the following: lovingly, Sandra The members thereof [1] must take counsel together in such wise that no occasion for ill-feeling or discord may arise. This can be attained when every member expresseth with absolute freedom his own opinion and setteth forth his argument. Should anyone oppose, he must on no account feel hurt for not until matters are fully discussed can the right way be revealed. The shining spark of truth cometh forth only after the clash of differing opinions. If after discussion, a decision be carried unanimously well and good; but if, the Lord forbid, differences of opinion should arise, a majority of voices must prevail. [1 Of a Spiritual Assembly] The first condition is absolute love and harmony amongst the members of the assembly. They must be wholly free from estrangement and must manifest in themselves the Unity of God, for they are the waves of one sea, the drops of one river, the stars of one heaven, the rays of one sun, the trees of one orchard, the flowers of one garden. Should harmony of thought and absolute unity be nonexistent, that gathering shall be dispersed and that assembly be brought to naught. The second condition is that the members of the assembly should unitedly elect a chairman and lay down guide-lines and by-laws for their meetings and discussions. The chairman should have charge of such rules and regulations and protect and enforce them; the other members should be submissive, and refrain from conversing on superfluous and extraneous matters. They must, when coming together, turn their faces to the Kingdom on high and ask aid from the Realm of Glory. They must then proceed with the utmost devotion, courtesy, dignity, care and moderation to express their views. They must in every matter search out the truth and not insist upon their own opinion, for stubbornness and persistence in one's views will lead ultimately to discord and wrangling and the truth will remain hidden. The honoured members must with all freedom express their own thoughts, and it is in no wise permissible for one to belittle the thought of another, nay, he must with moderation set forth the truth, and should differences of opinion arise a majority of voices must prevail, and all must obey and submit to the majority. It is again not permitted that any one of the honoured members object to or censure, whether in or out of the meeting, any decision arrived at previously, though that decision be not right, for such criticism would prevent any decision from being enforced. In short, whatsoever thing is arranged in harmony and with love and purity of motive, its result is light, and should the least trace of estrangement prevail the result shall be darkness upon darkness *If this be so regarded, that assembly shall be of God, but otherwise it shall lead to coolness and alienation that proceed from the Evil One Should they endeavour to fulfil these conditions the Grace of the Holy Spirit shall be vouchsafed unto them,* and that assembly shall become the centre of the Divine blessings, the hosts of Divine confirmation shall come to their aid, and they shall day by day receive a new effusion of Spirit. (Abdu'l-Baha, Selections from the Writings of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 88) __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
When Abdu'l-Baha expanded this membership to include the Guardian of the Cause, He also expanded the scope of the House of Justice to include such things as ruling on things that cause differences, etc. Dear Ahang, Might it be more precise to say when He made further elucidations as to Baha'u'llah's intentions as to the proper operation of the House? I think the passage from Shoghi Effendi which Brent cited applies here. warmest, Susan __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
In a hierarchical reading, it would suggest that the primary decision about disposition of the waqf resides with the Aghsan, but the House of Justice, when formed, has a role in execution of this decision. That is, it could be understood that the House of Justice, when formed, would assist Abdu'l-Baha in execution of decisions He made regarding waqf properties. Dear Ahang, That strikes me as reading much more into the passage than is actually there. It's seems pretty obviously chronological to me. Otherwise, the endowments shall revert to the people of Baha who speak not except by His leave snip Now this is the part I don't understand. Since Baha'u'llah has already mentioned the Aghsan and the House of Justice, then who has He in mind in this passage? Note the transition word: Otherwise! When He mentions the House of Justice He stipulates that His statement is contingent on the House of Justice having been formed *prior* to the end of the line of the Aghsan. The verse above applies if that House has not yet been formed. As it turned out, this was precisely the case and it was the Hands who represented the People of Baha until the House could be elected. warmest, Susan __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
In a message dated 1/31/2005 7:44:35 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dear Ahang,That's not how I recall his comments. My recollection is that he expected to*convene* the House of Justice, not just help with its election. I take thisto mean that he might very well have expected to chair it, but that the muchbroader functions of the Guardianship came as a surprise to him.warmest, Susan I have often thought that if the Guardian had survived, and actually convened the first House of Justice, the first order of business might have been to address the nature of the succession of the Guardian. But that was not to be. Regards, Scott __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
I have often thought that if the Guardian had survived, and actually convened the first House of Justice, the first order of business might have been to address the nature of the succession of the Guardian. But that was not to be. Dear Scott, But there is nothing in the Will and Testament that indicates that the House has anything to do with the issue of succession. That was supposed to be between the Guardian and the Hands. warmest, Susan __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
In a message dated 1/31/2005 8:54:21 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dear Scott,But there is nothing in the Will and Testament that indicates that the Househas anything to do with the issue of succession. That was supposed to bebetween the Guardian and the Hands. But succession was not the issue. There were no successors, the whole question of a Guardianship outside the succession would be a matter for legislation by the House IF, IF it were led by the Guardian acting as the Guardian. Regards, Scott __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
Personally, I don't think that the concept of not *mutilating* the World Order of Baha'u'llah is directly connected with the House focusing on Shoghi Effendi's interpretations. Rather, consulting those interpretations, when applicable, is one of the *implications* of avoiding such mutilation. Dear Mark, That's pretty much what I'm trying to say. In the context in which Shoghi Effendi wrote these words is that there were those (Ruth White) who objected to there even being a Guardian. It seems likely that, in numerous respects, aspects of Shoghi Effendi's work will become less relevant as time goes on. For instance, in the mid-20th century, he suggested that racism (racialism) was the most challenging issue facing Americans. Yes, but those things aren't matters of authoriative interpretation. It is those intepretations which will continue to be authoritative. warmest, Susan __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
There were no successors, the whole question of a Guardianship outside the succession would be a matter for legislation by the House IF, IF it were led by the Guardian acting as the Guardian. Dear Scott, If it were a matter of legislation it would be a matter of legislation with or without a Guardian. warmest, Susan __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
Hi, Susan, At 10:01 PM 1/31/2005, you wrote: Yes, but those things aren't matters of authoriative interpretation. It is those intepretations which will continue to be authoritative. No, but I think they are, at least in some instances, *applications* of the Guardian's interpretations to current events. In other words, some interpretations given by Shoghi Effendi may have been pure (given just for their own sakes) and others may have been applied. If the Guardian's discussion of, say, racism as the most challenging issue in the U.S., was a temporal application of his interpretive function, then it will lose its significance over time, and future applied interpretations will be impossible. Regards, Mark A. Foster http://markfoster.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger. Abbie Hoffman __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
In a message dated 1/31/2005 10:02:22 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dear Scott,If it were a matter of legislation it would be a matter of legislation withor without a Guardian.warmest, Susan The House is a consultative body. Where else would the Guardian have found to consult on the future of the Guardianship? Regards, Scott __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
But as before the infallibility in no way comes from the Guardian. Abdu'l-Baha envisioned a Universal House of Justice that would have a living Guardian serving on it at all times, and as its Head. In that formulation, why wouldn't the infallibility of the House come through the Guardian? In all the current discussions about the scope of the House, etc, folks make the assumption that when Universal House of Justice (or words that would refer to that exalted institution) are mentioned in the Writings, the same institution is meant. Let me add a little spice to the discussion by suggesting (and not that I personally believe that!!), what if that wasn't the case? That is, consider the following: Baha'u'llah envisioned a Universal House of Justice that was an elected office (without any mention of the Guardian whatsoever) concerned with affairs of State and people (see 8th Glad Tidings). But its scope had a limit: this House could not change things He had revealed, nor pass laws on acts of worship. The limits that Baha'u'llah envisioned for this House are quite important. It is not a House that can legislate, say, on Obligatory Prayers, because that is a matter of personal worship and Baha'u'llah anticipated a House that legislated as a Islamic shari'a, but enjoyed consultative and democratic norms. Abdu'l-Baha's vision may have been different. He instituted the office of the Guardianship, but one that would continued indefinitely -- and not just through letters written during 1920's thru 1950's, but a living, breathing Guardian who served as the Head of the House. In the WT, Abdu'l-Baha assures that the Guardian is under the care of the Twin Manifestations. Later, He states that the House is under this care. It seems to me that an argument could well be made that the assurance of infallibility, in that situation, is very much dependent on the service of the living Guardian. Furthermore, every bit of the writing we have from Shoghi Effendi clearly envisions a House of Justice that had a Guardian serving on it at all times. Could such a House of Justice, for instance, legislate on, say, obligatory prayers? Of course. Why? Because the Guardian had a brought mandate to interpret the Text, and he could have guided the deliberation of the House on acts of worship. So an argument could be put forth (and again, I'm not necessarily suggesting that argument, only pointing out that it has some merits), that the notion of the scope of the House of Justice very much changed from Baha'u'llah to Abdu'l-Baha/Shoghi Effendi. So, to say, the Writings says such and such about the House seems to be talking about apples and oranges. I don't have time now, but some time next week I might develop these thoughts more carefully, using all the actual Texts (and not just a summary, like in the Constitution of the House of Justice). Regards, Ahang. __ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 03:16:17 -0800 (PST), Ahang Rabbani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But as before the infallibility in no way comes from the Guardian. Abdu'l-Baha envisioned a Universal House of Justice that would have a living Guardian serving on it at all times, and as its Head. In that formulation, why wouldn't the infallibility of the House come through the Guardian? Sorry if I'm misunderstanding but are you a Remey-ite? -- pharoah is just a leaf on a burning bush __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
Sorry if I'm misunderstanding but are you a Remey-ite? Are you insane?? __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice -VERY LONG
Susan: Is that what your argument is based on, capitalization? Because as far as I know there is not any convention whereby Baha'is are supposed to use upper case letters to refer to the Universal House of Justice and lower case when referring to other institutions. The only difference between those passages using caps or not using caps as far as I can tell is that the former are translated by the Guardian and the latter are later translations. Dear Susan, Considering that I wasn't stating my opinion and and defining my personal logic in an attempt to persuade, I would have to say No to your question. I don't view this as a great debate with a winner and loser. I view this as consultation with a view to gaining new insights; and no vested interest in anyone accepting or rejecting my opinion. Actually, whenever, I have a curiosity about a particular topic I research for constancy in the writings. Having done that - I'm personally convinced that my initial understanding still holds... (for me at least!) Would you agree that in the English language words which are are capitalized enable the reader to distinguish, in context, the significance of the capitalization. For instance: God or god. I trust the Guardian intended to convey the distinctive nature of the title when capitalizing *Trustees*. He knew the value of nuances contained in the English language and utilized the language as a tool - I suspect it was an exercise he relished. World Order was the first Baha'i book I read and I still find it totally amazing as an example of the vast range of the English language with regard to clarity. I do hope Ahang can find time to track the scope of the House of Justice through the text. I think it's an important topic to pursue and gain a better understanding of the progression of the vision from Baha'u'llah, to Abdu'l-Baha and then the Guardian. Lovingly, Sandra __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
Gilberto, At 07:31 AM 1/30/2005, you wrote: Sorry if I'm misunderstanding but are you a Remey-ite? Sorry I didn't catch this message earlier. I have been running a fever. Ahang Rabbani is far from it. He is a devoted member of the Baha'i Faith. What would have made you come to that conclusion? Regards, Mark A. Foster http://markfoster.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger. Abbie Hoffman __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
Sorry if I'm misunderstanding but are you a Remey-ite? Are you insane?? LOL. Gilberto is not a Baha'i, Ahang, and he doesn't know you. But he is familiar with Remeyite arguments and some of your arguments resembled theirs. They insist that the infallibility of the House of Justice is something that flows only through the Guardian. warmest, Susan __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
Abdu'l-Baha envisioned a Universal House of Justice that would have a living Guardian serving on it at all times, and as its Head. In that formulation, why wouldn't the infallibility of the House come through the Guardian? Dear Ahang, First off, the Guardian did not have to serve on it at all times. He could send someone to do this on his behest. That person would certainly not share in the Guardian's infalliblity and the House's decisions would not be any less infallible because someone else chaired the meeting. Second, if Abdu'l-Baha thought the infallibility of the House flowed from the Guardian one would think He would have said that explicitly. There are Tablets from Abdu'l-Baha where He speaks of the House's infallibility but makes no mention of the Guardian whatsoever. In all the current discussions about the scope of the House, etc, folks make the assumption that when Universal House of Justice (or words that would refer to that exalted institution) are mentioned in the Writings, the same institution is meant. I think the assumption we are making is that Abdu'l-Baha is the authorized interpreter of Baha'u'llah's word. And hence the Master's elucidations on the operations of the House reflect Baha'u'llah's intentions. Let me add a little spice to the discussion by suggesting (and not that I personally believe that!!), what if that wasn't the case? From a historical standpoint one could reasonably argue that Abdu'l-Baha's teachings did not always reflect Baha'u'llah's intentions but from a theological standpoint I think that would be untenable in terms of the Covenant. In regards to a House with a sitting Guardian you write: Could such a House of Justice, for instance, legislate on, say, obligatory prayers? Of course. Why? Because the Guardian had a brought mandate to interpret the Text, and he could have guided the deliberation of the House on acts of worship. That doesn't make much sense to me, Ahang. The Guardian doesn't *need* the House to legislate where he can interpret. Yet he stated that the House, not himself, would decide this issue. I think the more reasonable explanation is that the clause in the Aqdas which says that acts of Worship should be done in accordance with the Book, did not exclude the House from ruling on 'matters that are obscure' in this regard. So, to say, the Writings says such and such about the House seems to be talking about apples and oranges. I don't see a different House being talked about. I see Abdu'l-Baha did stress two things which Baha'u'llah did not mention, the its being headed by a Guardian and the second being its infallibility. Your argument is that the two things are connected. I don't see that. Baha'u'lllah never talked explicitly about the infallibility of the House but then He never stated explicitly that Abdu'l-Baha was infallible, as we've discussed previously. Infallibility is simply a theme which Abdu'l-Baha stresses a lot, probably because He saw it as necessary to preserve authority after the passing of Baha'u'llah. warmest, Susan __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 03:16:17 -0800 (PST), Ahang Rabbani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But as before the infallibility in no way comes from the Guardian. Abdu'l-Baha envisioned a Universal House of Justice that would have a living Guardian serving on it at all times, and as its Head. In that formulation, why wouldn't the infallibility of the House come through the Guardian? What evidence is there that he envisioned a living Guardian? And if so, and he was just totally wrong on this point, what does that mean in terms of infallibility? Peace Gilberto pharoah is just a leaf on a burning bush __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice -VERY LONG
Considering that I wasn't stating my opinion and and defining my personal logic in an attempt to persuade, I would have to say No to your question. I don't view this as a great debate with a winner and loser. Dear Sandra, Sorry if I came down too hard in that last post. I'm using the term argument in the sense of a fact or assertion offered as evidence that something is true. You wrote: Would you agree that in the English language words which are are capitalized enable the reader to distinguish, in context, the significance of the capitalization. For instance: God or god. God is used a proper noun when it is capitalized if that is what you mean. But I'm not sure what you mean by enabling 'the reader to distinguish, in context, the significance of the capitalization.' I trust the Guardian intended to convey the distinctive nature of the title when capitalizing *Trustees*. Okay, but as I mentioned the only time he capitalized it was in that passage from the Iqan which does not refer to the members of any House of Justice, local or universal. The other passages you cited are not translated by the Guardian. The other cases are ones where he uses it in caps as a title in GPB and the World Order letters. I don't see any consistency in where he uses or doesn't use caps in conection with those texts. In any case, my point, is that you are ascribing a meaning to those texts which doesn't follow either from the rules of English grammar or from the Guardian's own usage. I don't see him adopting a convention of capitalizing references to the Universal House of Justice. warmest, Susan __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
In a message dated 1/30/2005 12:29:19 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What evidence is there that he envisioned a living Guardian? Dear Gilberto, Abdu'l-Baha talks about the Guardian being the head of the Universal House of Justice for life in the Will and Testament. "And if so, and he was just totally wrong on this point, what does thatmean in terms of infallibility?" It wasn't prophecy, Gilberto, it was His Will and Testament that this be the case. However, that Will and Testament also placed certain conditions on how future Guardians could be selected, conditions which as it turned out could not be met after Shoghi Effendi died. What the Remeyite do is ignore those conditions in order to have another Guardian. What the rest of the Baha'i community did was go back to what Baha'u'llah said was to happen if His lineage ran out before the election of the Universal House of Justice. This was stated in the Aqdas: "Endowments dedicated to charity revert to God, the Revealer of Signs. None hath the right to dispose of them without leave from Him Who is the Dawning-place of Revelation. After Him, this authority shall pass to the Aghsán, and after them to the House of Justice--should it be established in the world by then--that they may use these endowments for the benefit of the Places which have been exalted in this Cause, and for whatsoever hath been enjoined upon them by Him Who is the God of might and power. Otherwise, the endowments shall revert to the people of Bahá who speak not except by His leave and judge not save in accordance with what God hath decreed in this Tablet--lo, they are the champions of victory betwixt heaven and earth--that they may use them in the manner that hath been laid down in the Book by God, the Mighty, the Bountiful." That is pretty much what we did until the Universal House of Justice was elected in 1963. Note that Baha'u'llah assumes here thatthe House of Justice can operate without an "Aghsan" (a descendent of Baha'u'llah) which the Will and Testament stipulated a Guardian had to be. warmest, Susan __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice -VERY LONG
Dr. G. Thanks, the unsubscribe request went through From: "Richard H. Gravelly" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: "Baha'i Studies" bahai-st@list.jccc.edu To: "Baha'i Studies" bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Subject: Re: Scope of the House of Justice -VERY LONG Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 11:58:01 -0800 The compilation is excellent Sandra.Thank you much. Richard. __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
Dear Ahang, you wrote: --- Abdu'l-Baha envisioned a Universal House of Justice that would have a living Guardian serving on it at all times, and as its Head. In that formulation, why wouldn't the infallibility of the House come through the Guardian? what makes you so certain that Abdu'l-Baha envisioned a Universal House of Justice that would have a living Guardian serving on it all the time? I have not read all the posts in this thread, so I may be making a stupid comment here. I thought this too, until someone suggested to me that the guidance of the first Guardian as laid down in numerous letters could be seen as that there is still a Guardian, and that the Universal House of Justice consults with the Guardian when they consult his letters. __ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
Dear Susan, you wrote: What the rest of the Baha'i community did was go back to what Baha'u'llah said was to happen if His lineage ran out before the election of the Universal House of Justice. This was stated in the Aqdas: "Endowments dedicated to charity revert to God, the Revealer of Signs. None hath the right to dispose of them without leave from Him Who is the Dawning-place of Revelation. After Him, this authority shall pass to the Aghsán, and after them to the House of Justice--should it be established in the world by then--that they may use these endowments for the benefit of the Places which have been exalted in this Cause, and for whatsoever hath been enjoined upon them by Him Who is the God of might and power. Otherwise, the endowments shall revert to the people of Bahá who speak not except by His leave and judge not save in accordance with what God hath decreed in this Tablet--lo, they are the champions of victory betwixt heaven and earth--that they may use them in the manner that hath been laid down in the Book by God, the Mighty, the Bountiful." I think this verse in Kitab-i-Aqdas is just referring to the matter of endowmwnt (vaqf and oqaf) and how it should be handled. Why should one relate it to Guardian? I have also heard some Baha'is saying that by this verse Baha'u'llah indeed talked about the institution of Guardianship. Personally I think this verse is not saying anything about this institution or what you're saying above. Do you have any authorized comments about this verse that I may have not seen. That is pretty much what we did until the Universal House of Justice was elected in 1963. Note that Baha'u'llah assumes here thatthe House of Justice can operate without an "Aghsan" (a descendent of Baha'u'llah) which the Will and Testament stipulated a Guardian had to be. As far as I understand Baha'u'llah never mentions about the Institution of Guardian. Abdu'l-Baha created this institution and I guess it was meant to be temporary. Regards, Firouz __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
I thought this too, until someone suggested to me that the guidance of the first Guardian as laid down in numerous letters could be seen as that there is still a Guardian, and that the Universal House of Justice consults with the Guardian when they consult his letters. Dear Janine, I think the Guardian's interpretations continue to serve the function of the Guardianship such that were the House to ignore them they would essentially be 'mutilating' the Cause by divorcing it from the Guardianship. However, the Will and Testament makes provisions for a continuing line of Guardians by stating how they are to be selected, etc. That didn't happen because all those who might have been eligible violated the Covenant. In other words, if there isn't a continuing line of Guardians it was because of the sinfullness of some of the believers, not any lack of ismat on Abdu'l-Baha's part. warmest, Susan __ 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
re: Scope of the House of Justice
Because Baha'u'llah makes no mention of the Institution of the Guardianship by name in His Writings; and because even those references in His Writings to a hereditary successor are limited to Him Who hath branched from this mighty Stock, Him Who hath branched from this Ancient Root, and the Aghsan; Shoghi Effendi needed to spend some time explaining to the friends that the Institution of the Guardianship was rooted in Baha'u'llah's original intentions for His World Order, and was not an innovation brought into being by the Master. In fact, this was the very first subject addressed by Shoghi Effendi in the first of his World Order letters: The validity of institutions that stand inextricably interwoven with the Faith of Baha'u'llah, institutions which stand at the very basis of the World Order ushered in by Baha'u'llah. (WOB 3) The Guardian then explains, in his magnificent way, the inter-relationship between the Most Holy Book and the Master's Will; and that Baha'u'llah deliberately left a gap which the Master's Will fills. (WOB 4). Though Baha'u'llah anticipates these institutions they are unspecified in the Aqdas. Then the Guardian uses two crucial words to specify that the institutions specified in the Master's Will were not an innovation brought about after the Master's passing, but had their origins in the Mind of Baha'u'llah Himself: Divorced and mutilated. The Guardian states that to *divorce* what Abdu'l-Baha has revealed in His Will from the Teachings of Baha'u'llah would be an unpardonable affront to the Master's fidelity to Baha'u'llah. (WOB 3) The Guardian also states that the system of Baha'i administration is not an innovation but is derived from the Will and from the Most Holy Book. To dissociate this administration from the rest of the Teachings brought by Baha'u'llah would be, he states, tantamount to a *mutilation* of the body of the Cause. (WOB 4) So Shoghi Effendi took the time to explain with perfect clarity that the Guardianship was not something separate from Baha'u'llah's original plan. The Guardian restates and elaborates this point, in his most massively misunderstood statement, in the Dispensation: Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship the World Order of Baha'u'llah would be mutilated... (WOB 148) This is not a statement about what would happen if the Guardian died without a successor. Read it in context (WOB 147 ff.) It is a statement that builds on what the Guardian had written in his first World Order letter, quoted above: The Institution of the Guardianship is rooted in the general scheme of Baha'i Dispensation (WOB 4) brought by Baha'u'llah; and to divorce it from Baha'u'llah's original intent would be a mutilation of the body of the Cause. (WOB 5 and 148). With the interpretive guidance of the Guardian, we were able to see those allusions in Baha'u'llah's Writings to this sacred institution. In support of the primacy of the hereditary Guardianship, Shoghi Effendi also quotes from a Tablet of the Master concerning intestate succession to emphasize the importance of the hereditary office of the Guardianship: ...In all the divine Dispensations the eldest son hath been given extraordinary distinctions. Even the station of prophethood hath been his birthright... The full Tablet can be read at http://bahai-library.com/?file=abdulbaha_inheritance_bwc.html Though the subject of the Tablet was inheritance, Shoghi Effendi applies it to the sacred institution of the Guardianship. In like manner, though the subject of Paragraph 42 of the Aqdas is the wakf, the endowments dedicated to charity, the contents have reference to the institution of the Guardianship, and to the all-important matter of the succession after the Manifestation. Brent __ 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
re: Scope of the House of Justice
Abdu'l-Baha envisioned a Universal House of Justice that would have a living Guardian serving on it at all times, and as its Head. In that formulation, why wouldn't the infallibility of the House come through the Guardian? I would like to offer some thoughts on this subject raised by Haji Mirza Jinab-i-Ahang Texas-i. The House of Justice has itself confirmed that Shoghi Effendi obviously envisaged the House of Justice and the Guardian functioning together. (Messages 1963-1986, p. 87) The House of Justice continues, however, that it cannot logically be deduced from this that one is unable to function in the absence of the other. During the whole thirty-six years of his Guardianship Shoghi Effendi functioned without the Universal House of Justice. Now the Universal House of Justice must function without the Guardian... (Ibid.) The House of Justice has published a number of quotations from the Master and from Shoghi Effendi that state that the divine guidance flowing to the Universal House of Justice comes through its elected members and is not derived from the Guardian: Nowhere is it stated that the infallibility of the Universal House of Justice is by virtue of the Guardian's membership or presence on that body. Indeed, Abdu'l-Bah in His Will and Shoghi Effendi in his 'Dispensation of Bah'u'llh' have both explicitly stated that the elected members of the Universal House of Justice in consultation are recipients of unfailing Divine Guidance. (Messages, p. 157) This is one of the themes throughout the three great letters of the House of Justice on the subject of the House of Justice and the Guardian. This is not to minimize the role of the Guardian on that Body. As the Master's title is Ghusn-i-Azam, Most Mighty Branch, Shoghi Effendi's title given him by the Master in His Will is Ghusn-i-Mumtaz which he translates as Chosen Branch. The word mumtaz has a range of meanings, and it appears again in the Master's Will in this verse, translated by Shoghi Effendi as distinguished: By this body all the difficult problems are to be resolved and the Guardian of the Cause of God is its sacred head and the distinguished member for life of that body. (The Will and Testament, p. 14) As the House says, though the vision of the Master was that these institutions would function together, the view that the infallibility of the House was through the Guardian is not supported in the Writings. There are several statements in the Master's Tablets and in the Guardian's writings that expressly state that infallible divine guidance flows directly to the elected members. This one is from the Will itself: Unto the Most Holy Book every one must turn and all that is not expressly recorded therein must be referred to the Universal House of Justice. That which this body, whether unanimously or by a majority doth carry, that is verily the Truth and the Purpose of God Himself. Whoso doth deviate therefrom is verily of them that love discord, hath shown forth malice and turned away from the Lord of the Covenant. By this House is meant that Universal House of Justice *which is to be elected* from all countries, that is from those parts in the East and West where the loved ones are to be found, after the manner of the customary elections in Western countries such as those of England It is incumbent upon *these members* (of the Universal House of Justice) to gather in a certain place and deliberate upon all problems which have caused difference, questions that are obscure and matters that are not expressly recorded in the Book. Whatsoever *they* decide has the same effect as the Text itself. (Will and Testament p. 20; emphasis added). The point is made even more sharp by realizing that this verse, contained in the second part of the Will, was written when not an hour's life was left to the Master, and that there is no reference to Shoghi Effendi or to the institution of Guardianship in this second part of the Will. In a Tablet the Master refers to the guidance flowing to the body of the House of Justice whose members are elected by and known to the worldwide Baha'i community in these words: Let it not be imagined that the House of Justice will take any decision according to its own concepts and opinions. God forbid! The Supreme House of Justice will take decisions and establish laws through the inspiration and confirmation of the Holy Spirit, because it is in the safekeeping and under the shelter and protection of the Ancient Beauty, and obedience to its decisions is a bounden and essential duty and an absolute obligation, and there is no escape for anyone. Say, O People: Verily the Supreme House of Justice is under the wings of your Lord, the Compassionate, the All Merciful, that is under His protection, His care, and His shelter; for He has commanded the firm believers to obey that blessed, sanctified, and all-subduing body, whose sovereignty is divinely
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
Hi Susan, you write: I'm still not persuaded that the Guardian is making a point about any 'uniqueness' to the divine guidance of the House of Justice in this passage. It seems to me he is describing the same process that all our elected insitutions are expected to follow. Mind you, I do think that the divine guidance of the House of Justice is guaranteed in ways it may not be for our local or national bodies... You may be right. I recall Mr. Nakhjavani stating his view that the nature of the guidance flowing to the House was the same as to the Local and National Assemblies; but that it was guaranteed, as you mention. But to me, there is no comparison anywhere in the Writings about the guidance flowing to Local and National Assemblies/ Houses of Justice, to the passage on page 11 of the Will where the Master states that the Bab and Baha'u'llah guide the Universal House of Justice: The sacred and youthful branch, the Guardian of the Cause of God, as well as the Universal House of Justice to be universally elected and established, are both under the care and protection of the Abha Beauty, under the shelter and unerring guidance of the Exalted One (may my life be offered up for them both). The Guardian refers to that passage in these words: The Guardian's infallibility covers interpretation of the Revealed Word and its application. Likewise any instructions he may issue having to do with the protection of the Faith, or its well being must be closely obeyed, as he is infallible in the protection of the Faith. He is assured the guidance of both Baha'u'llah and the Bab, as the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha clearly reveals. (From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer, August 20, 1956; Lights of Guidance, 2nd edition, p. 313, #1055) (I feel justified in saying that the Guardian was referring to that passage of the Will, because it is the only verse in the Will I see where the guidance of Baha'u'llah and the Bab is referred to.) The Guardian is in this passage, it seems to me, giving pre-eminence to the guidance flowing to him. His guidance is mentioned in the same passage referring to the guidance flowing to the Universal House of Justice -- in my view, the central statement in the Master's Will, His Covenant, the part that expresses God's part of that Covenant. (The next sentences on page 11 of the Will describe our part -- turning to the House and the Guardian.) But as you say, you feel that the difference is that this guidance is guaranteed, and that is also explicit in that passage from the Guardian, He is assured the guidance of both Baha'u'llah and the Bab. This passage in the Will referring to both Manifestations, is also, it seems to me, an elucidation of the passage from Baha'u'llah I quoted earlier in this thread, where He says that God will guide the membership of the Universal House of Justice. That is, the Will states that this means both Manifestations; and this seems quite important to Shoghi Effendi to state. It is, perhaps, also reflected in this statement of the Guardian about the two Manifestations presiding over the destinies of the Faith: Allied, though subordinate in rank, and invested with the authority of presiding with Him over the destinies of this supreme Dispensation, there shines upon this mental picture the youthful glory of the Bb... (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 97) I find it interesting that the Guardian clarifies the guidance flowing to him and the House of Justice as coming from both Manifestations, and emphasizes the point. As far as comparable Writings so clearly specifying the source of the guidance animating, say, the local spiritual assemblies, I haven't found one. Though there is that beautiful passage from the Master: These Spiritual Assemblies, is 'Abdu'l-Bah's testimony, in a Tablet addressed to an American believer, are aided by the Spirit of God. Their defender is 'Abdu'l-Bah. Over them He spreadeth His Wings. What bounty is there greater than this? (Quoted in God Passes By, p. 332) A lovely image, the same one used by Christ: O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not! (Luke 13:34) Much love Brent __ 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 -
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
But to me, there is no comparison anywhere in the Writings about the guidance flowing to Local and National Assemblies/ Houses of Justice, to the passage on page 11 of the Will where the Master states that the Bab and Baha'u'llah guide the Universal House of Justice: Dear Brent, Yes, that passage from the Will and Testament makes for a much better argument, I think. ;-}There is also this one from Lawh-i-Bayt-ul-Adl-Azam va sl-i-Qad: Let it not be imagined that the House of Justice will take any decision according to its own concepts and opinions. God forbid! The Supreme House of Justice will take decisions and establish laws through the inspiration and confirmation of the Holy Spirit, because it is in the safekeeping and under the shelter and protection of the Ancient Beauty, and obedience to its decisions is a bounden and essential duty and an absolute obligation, and there is no escape for anyone. Say, O People: Verily the Supreme House of Justice is under the wings of your Lord, the Compassionate, the All-Merciful, that is under His protection, His care, and His shelter; for He has commanded the firm believers to obey that blessed, sanctified, and all-subduing body There, of course, only Baha'u'llah and not the Bab is mentioned. But as before the infallibility in no way comes from the Guardian. warmest, Susan __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice -VERY LONG
I'm in complete agreement with Brent's understanding and I feel that is supported by numerous references from Baha'u'llah's Writings where the *Trustees* are a direct reference the the [Universal] House of Justice. Dear Sandra, Some of those passage you cite would refer only to the Universal House of Justice and some to Houses of Justice in general. I don't think that the term 'trustee' is any hint as to which He is referring to. All members of any elected institution are 'Trustees of the Merciful.' warmest, Susan __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice -VERY LONG
Susan: Some of those passage you cite would refer only to the Universal House of Justice and some to Houses of Justice in general. I don't think that the term 'trustee' is any hint as to which He is referring to. All members of any elected institution are 'Trustees of the Merciful.' Dear Susan, Perhaps the quote below is one you are thinking of: 5. The Lord hath ordained that in every city a House of Justice be established wherein shall gather counsellors to the number of Baha, and should it exceed this number it does not matter... It behoveth them to be the trusted ones of the Merciful among men and to regard themselves as the guardians appointed of God for all that dwell on earth. It is incumbent upon them to take counsel together and to have regard for the interests of the servants of God, for His sake, even as they regard their own interests, and to choose that which is meet and seemly. Thus hath the Lord your God, the Gracious, the Pardoner, commanded you. Beware lest ye put away that which is clearly revealed in His Tablet. Fear God, O ye that perceive. (Baha'u'llah, Synopsis and Codification of the Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 13) and this one also: To repudiate the validity of the assemblies of the elected ministers of the Faith of Bahá'u'lláh would be to reject those countless Tablets of Bahá'u'lláh and 'Abdu'l-Bahá wherein They have extolled the station of the trustees of the Merciful, enumerated their privileges and duties, emphasized the glory of their mission, revealed the immensity of their task, and warned them of the attacks they must needs expect from the unwisdom of their friends as well as from the malice of their enemies. It is surely for those to whose hands so priceless a heritage has been committed to prayerfully watch lest the tool should supersede the Faith itself, lest undue concern for the minute details arising from the administration of the Cause obscure the vision of its promoters, lest partiality, ambition, and worldliness tend in the course of time to becloud the radiance, stain the purity, and impair the effectiveness of the Faith of Bahá'u'lláh. (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 9) Now, if I were not aware of the Guardian's persnickety precision in his English translations, I might agree that all the previous post references referred to any Baha'i House of Justice. However, I have no doubt that the Guardian understood the capitalization of proper nouns. Having said that; I did notice that there were two quotes from the Guardian, which I included before, where the word *trustees* was not capitalized. I will also concede that there is a margin of error involved from written work to printed text... But, taking that into consideration does not outweigh my gut feeling. In closing, I took a swim OCEAN and found no other references besides the two quoted here that literally ties the phrase trustees of the Merciful to Local Houses of Justice. I view 'Trustees of the Merciful' [as written] to be a specific title or phrase that constitutes the distinctive designation of this particular legislative body. Lovingly, Sandra __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice -VERY LONG
In a message dated 1/29/2005 6:55:36 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Now, if I were not aware of the Guardian's persnickety precision in his English translations, I might agree that all the previous post references referred to any Baha'i House of Justice. However, I have no doubt that the Guardian understood the capitalization of proper nouns." Dear Sandra, Is that what your argument is based on, capitalization? Because as far as I know there is not any convention whereby Baha'is are supposed to use upper case letters to refer to the Universal House of Justice and lower case when referring to other institutions. The only difference between those passages using caps or not using caps as far as I can tell is that the former are translated by the Guardian and the latter arelater translations. The one exception I see is that passage from the Iqan and I don't think that is referring to the members of the House of Justice at all. That strikes me rather as a reference to the Manifestation and the authorized interpreters. warmest, Susan __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
Brent wrote: For example on page 6 of the Constitution, quoted from WOB 153, the Guardian states that the House is divinely guided whether it is making legislative, administrative, or judicial decisions. Susan Wrote: What passage from the World Order of Baha'u'llah are you referring to Brent? Can you post it here? Susan. Sure: In the conduct of the administrative affairs of the Faith, in the enactment of the legislation necessary to supplement the laws of the Kitb-i-Aqdas, the members of the Universal House of Justice, it should be borne in mind, are not, as Bah'u'llh's utterances clearly imply, responsible to those whom they represent, nor are they allowed to be governed by the feelings, the general opinion, and even the convictions of the mass of the faithful, or of those who directly elect them. They are to follow, in a prayerful attitude, the dictates and promptings of their conscience. They may, indeed they must, acquaint themselves with the conditions prevailing among the community, must weigh dispassionately in their minds the merits of any case presented for their consideration, but must reserve for themselves the right of an unfettered decision. 'God will verily inspire them with whatsoever He willeth', is Bah'u'llh's incontrovertible assurance. They, and not the body of those who either directly or indirectly elect them, have thus been made the recipients of the divine guidance which is at once the life-blood and ultimate safeguard of this Revelation. The legislative and judicial functions are explicit. The judicial function is expressed in the words any case presented for their consideration. This quote is particularly important because it specifies that it is the elected membership that receives this guidance; i.e. not dependent on the presence of the Guardian. Finally, Shoghi Effendi describes this guidance that flows to the elected membership as the ultimate safeguard of the Revelation. This is in contrast to democracies, where the ultimate safeguard is the informed electorate, with the corollary of the extreme importance of freedom of the press. In the Baha'i system the ultimate safeguard is, to paraphrase from the Master's Will, the whispers of the Bab and Baha'u'llah in the ears of the House members; or, as Shoghi Effendi says in the above passage, their conscience. When all is said and done ten thousand years from now, it may well be that, after the Master, this guidance will be seen to have been the greatest legacy that Baha'u'llah has left. Brent __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
Hi Susan, you wrote: That particular passage does not strike me as saying anything different than what is true of all of our elected institutions... It seems to me that that entire passage from the Guardian quoted by the House in its Constitution is an elucidation of the verse God will verily inspire them with whatsoever He willeth which comes from Baha'u'llah's Leaves of Paradise: It is incumbent upon the Trustees of the House of Justice to take counsel together regarding those things which have not outwardly been revealed in the Book, and to enforce that which is agreeable to them. God will verily inspire them with whatsoever He willeth, and He, verily, is the Provider, the Omniscient. (Tablets of Baha'u'llah, p. 68) It is clear from the words Trustees of the House of Justice, and the words those things which have not outwardly been revealed in the Book, that this passage solely applies to the Universal House of Justice. If there is any doubt that this verse is intended to also apply to subordinate bodies, the Guardian's elucidation makes clear that it does not: They, and not the body of those who either directly or indirectly elect them.. Those who directly elect them are the National Spiritual Assembly members; those who indirectly elect them are the adult believers over 21, and the delegates to the National Conventions. So it seems clear to me that this passage from Shoghi Effendi quoted from the Dispensation by the House in its Constitution, is precisely on point, referring to the unique guidance flowing to the Universal House of Justice. Brent wrote: Finally, Shoghi Effendi describes this guidance that flows to the elected membership as the ultimate safeguard of the Revelation. Susan replied: Huh? I didn't see that phrase in the passage you cited. It's the last sentence: They, and not the body of those who either directly or indirectly elect them, have thus been made the recipients of the divine guidance which is at once the life-blood and ultimate safeguard of this Revelation. Tu Hermano Brent __ 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
RE: Scope of the House of Justice
It seems to me that that entire passage from the Guardian quoted by the House in its Constitution is an elucidation of the verse God will verily inspire them with whatsoever He willeth which comes from Baha'u'llah's Leaves of Paradise: It is incumbent upon the Trustees of the House of Justice to take counsel together regarding those things which have not outwardly been revealed in the Book, and to enforce that which is agreeable to them. God will verily inspire them with whatsoever He willeth, and He, verily, is the Provider, the Omniscient. (Tablets of Baha'u'llah, p. 68) Dear Brent, But that again is as true for any House of Justice, whether local or Universal. It is clear from the words Trustees of the House of Justice, and the words those things which have not outwardly been revealed in the Book, that this passage solely applies to the Universal House of Justice. Why would it apply only the Universal House of Justice? If there is any doubt that this verse is intended to also apply to subordinate bodies, the Guardian's elucidation makes clear that it does not: They, and not the body of those who either directly or indirectly elect them.. Those who directly elect them are the National Spiritual Assembly members; those who indirectly elect them are the adult believers over 21, and the delegates to the National Conventions. Again, that does not make it clear to me at all. Our NSAs are indirectly elected as well, as are our regional councils. Unless you are taking the word 'body' more literally than I am and using it to refer to NSAs as an institution. I don't think that makes much sense. NSAs as bodies do not elect the members of the House of Justice, they vote in this case as individual members. So it seems clear to me that this passage from Shoghi Effendi quoted from the Dispensation by the House in its Constitution, is precisely on point, referring to the unique guidance flowing to the Universal House of Justice. Brent wrote: Finally, Shoghi Effendi describes this guidance that flows to the elected membership as the ultimate safeguard of the Revelation. Susan replied: Huh? I didn't see that phrase in the passage you cited. It's the last sentence: They, and not the body of those who either directly or indirectly elect them, have thus been made the recipients of the divine guidance which is at once the life-blood and ultimate safeguard of this Revelation. Okay, that was cut off when you posted the passage earlier. I'm still not persuaded that the Guardian is making a point about any 'uniqueness' to the divine guidance of the House of Justice in this passage. It seems to me he is describing the same process that all our elected insitutions are expected to follow. Mind you, I do think that the divine guidance of the House of Justice is guaranteed in ways it may not be for our local or national bodies, but I don't think we can reach that conclusion on the basis of this particular quote. warmest, Susan __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
Two at that time members of the Universal House of Justice, on two different occasions (in speeches given in the Netherlands), as well as what I heard from several people I know who worked for several years at the world centre, that the House only makes a decision after having obtained unanimous agreement. So unless all members agree, the matter is not decided on and will continued to be consulted on. May wisdom and love light your path, janine van rooij dublin, ireland Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
Dear Brent, In the early days of the House, that is, for the first few years, every communication was signed by the House. The idea of the Secretariat came later as the number of such communications increased. Presently, as you note, letters actually signed by the House are pretty rare -- Ridvan letters and other special occasion letters (though even individuals have received communications in the recent times that were signed by the House itself). There is no question that both kind of communications represent the will of the House and are binding, and both are produced through the supervision of the House. But there are differences. After all, one is over the signature of a non-House member and the other is over the signature of UHJ. One requires only 5 members of the House to approve (by initialing), while the other often requires the full membership of the House to approve and to initial. One is drafted often by non-House members (subject to alterations by the House members), while the other is often produced by the House members themselves and goes through a more rigorous screening process. (e.g. the Peace Letter was reworked by the House itself 13 times.) Setting aside the issue of mechanics, ask yourself: If you were a body that was burdened by infallibility, how would you ensure that it remained intact over many generations? The answer is simple: You absolutely minimize the occasions where *potential* for errors could appear. But how do you that when you have to produce several hundred letters a day (and whole lot more in the years to come)? Simple: You create a secondary body that will act as your mouthpiece, but is not burdened by the infallibility issue. It is a brilliant idea! And the only way to protect infallibility of the House over long term. I like to share a few more thoughts, but will do that later today when I have a bit more time. Regards, Ahang. __ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
In a message dated 1/27/2005 1:51:20 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "I believe the Secretariat is composed not of a pool of typists, but comprises the personal assistants of each House member, as well as some other staff members." Dear Brent, That is what I observed in Haifa. If Shirley is out there somewhere she can confirm this. As you know, she served in this capacity for a number of years. "But I don't think that the fact that a letter is signed by a member of the Secretariat is an indication that the decision or guidance embodied in that letter, is not the product of consultation by the entire body of the House of Justice; it may well have been the product of consultation by all nine members." My understanding is that they may not have consulted on the precise letter they are answering. In some case the Secretariat draws up a response based on letters written previously. Then five House members initial it. Still, the 'guidance embodied' in the letter, as you put it had been consulted on by the House at some time or another. "I'm not sure how the House decides when one of its members will sign a letter, and when one of the staff will. Maybe the House just doesn't want to have one of its members have to sign all those letters, so it is just a matter of convenience." I think it has more to do with the significance of the letter in question. The House signs documents that are of more general and long-lasting significance. "For example on page 6 of the Constitution, quoted from WOB 153, the Guardian states that the House is divinely guided whether it is making legislative, administrative, or judicial decisions." What passage from the World Order of Baha'u'llah are you referring to Brent? Can you post it here? warmest, Susan __ 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
Re: Scope of the House of Justice
In a message dated 1/27/2005 5:28:29 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "In the early days of the House, that is, for the first few years, everycommunication was signed by the House. The idea of the "Secretariat" camelater as the number of such communications increased." Dear Ahang, Might that not suggest that earlier House members did not have staffers to help them with these tasks? "There is no question that both kind of communications represent the will of theHouse and are binding, and both are produced through the supervision of theHouse. But there are differences." Earlier you made the analogy to this practice and that of letters written on behalf of the Guardian. If what you are saying is that such decisions are binding but not infallible, are you also saying that all the interpretations made in letters on behalf of the Guardian are likewise not infallible? Because if so, there goes the bulk of our authoritative interpretations! "One requires only5 members of the House to approve (by initialing), while the other oftenrequires the full membership of the House to approve and to initial." The more important letters signed by the Secretariat are likewise approved by all members, and often two or three drafts are made before it goes out. My understanding are that the only ones that go out with the initials of only five members are those on which the House has made an earlier ruling, and often portions of previous letters on that topic are then used. "But how do you that when you have to produce several hundred letters a day (andwhole lot more in the years to come)? Simple: You create a secondary bodythat will act as your mouthpiece, but is not burdened by the infallibilityissue." That's an interesting theory but I wouldn't assume it to be true without the House explicitly stating something to this effect. warmest, Susan __ 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
