Dear Dr. Maneck,
Sounds like very good advice, I am, going to take it.
Ron
On Jan 5, 2008 9:23 PM, Susan Maneck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But how about
\focusing on what really matters in what I am asking...for instance, why
not
reveal in whatever will ultimately become the Universal
Susan,
Thank you very much. I need to study it more, but already the key points in
the section Women in the Writings of Baha'u'llah are right on point and
appreciated!
Could I ask for a little exploration of the following excerpt?
Perhaps the key issue in this debate revolves around the
PROTECTED]
To: bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Subject: Re: Kitab-I-Aqdas and other questions
Susan,
Thank you very much. I need to study it more, but already the key points in the
section Women in the Writings of Baha'u'llah are right on point and
appreciated!
Could I ask for a little
Context. Perhaps this is the most concise way to illustrate the core of my
concerns about my beliefs, how they seem to differ from most Baha'is, and
sadly for me, I fear from what our Institutions such as the Learned and the
Administration would believe.
Dear Ron,
I think the above is the
Susan,
Thank you for your response. One point I want to clarify.
Dr. Maneck wrote:
What does omnipotence and omniscience have to do with context? In any
case, the Guardian indicated that the Manifestation is omniscient at
will. I think Baha'is have different understandings of what that
Ursus Maximus
Well,
I am not going to agitate, but I do want to be able to say I believe
what I believe, rather than keeping it secret. There is a difference,
in my mind. I think freedom of speech is important, and I don't believe
that stating one's beliefs should be considered agitating.
The fact that Manifestations clearly chose to do many things, and to not do
other things, including reveal many things, in ways that (obviously to me,
not necessarily to others) could have been done better or more efficiently
or more effectively had they truly been Omnipotent and Omniscient,
dear susan,
imho we are moving closer together.
with homage to derrida, foucalt and mr rogers neighborhood let me clarify my
statement:
there is an organism that we will call member of the Baha'i Faith. the
Taxonomist (the UHJ) observes the motion (pattern of behaviour) of
numerous
There is more than a little cultural arrogance in the above statement.
The Baha'i Revelation is for the entire world, not just us Americans
who are too lazy to learn anyone else's language.
well, i'm not american, but i know of nothing to substantiate the lazy
comment.
I think you are
There is more than a little cultural arrogance in the above statement.
The Baha'i Revelation is for the entire world, not just us Americans
who are too lazy to learn anyone else's language.
well, i'm not american, but i know of nothing to substantiate the lazy
comment.
Dear Maidenleaf,
Baha'u'llah's stated in His
Texts however is NOT all from classic Islamic sources...
p.s. i do understand frustration.
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 13:21:41 -0600
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Subject: Re: Kitab-I-Aqdas and other questions
There is more than a little
said that.i no longer want to be part of what is going on
here...
have fun !!!
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 23:50:47 +0100
Subject: Kitab-I-Aqdas and other questions
On 5 Jan 2008 at 14:03, maidenhairleaf wrote:
That is why I object
for or be desirous of change.
acceptance and contentment is better !!!
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 23:50:47 +0100
Subject: Kitab-I-Aqdas and other questions
On 5 Jan 2008 at 14:03, maidenhairleaf wrote:
That is why I object to Juan's
But how about
\focusing on what really matters in what I am asking...for instance, why not
reveal in whatever will ultimately become the Universal language, which an
Omniscient manifestation would know.
Dear Ron,
For all you know He did. ;-}
You see, Islam and Christianity and Hinduism and
Susan wrote:
I don't think it is necessary for the Baha'i Faith to eliminate all
other religions. Does that answer your question?
warmest, Susan
I guess so.
Ron
The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto (e-mail)
is sent by the Johnson County Community
By the by, can I get a copy of the Amr va Khalq, I'd love to try to
pick through it.
Go to
http://reference.bahai.org/fa/t/c/
it's item 6 in the list
and while you are there, look around -- the place is a treasure-trove
Sen
--
On 3 Jan 2008 at 18:32, maidenhairleaf wrote:
...it obviously was not the letter
that states dis-enrollment or the reason for the action, but rather a
blanket statement about specific issues.
Yes you are correct here and to avoid any secrecy or misconception about
Sen's enrollment here are
“So, I wondered if you and others on the list would see anything particularly
disturbing about the quote from Sen I will repeat below. It does matter, in
my opinion, whether knowledgeable Baha'is think my views and understandings,
the very ones that caused me to declare, are within acceptable
So I hope you understand why, I took
such a stern tone in response to Susan's claims about the Universal
House of Justices' views of Sen's writing. It is not her place to
decide which of Sen's statements are the ones they are referring to,
if they themselves have not stated this.
As I
thoguth I was joinign a relion without clergy, but the institiution of
the leerned plays all fo the roels tha tI tradivally thoguth of as clerical.
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 08:19:33 -0800
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Subject: Re: Kitab-I-Aqdas and other questions
that would be asked do that work
my skill set is somewhat different.
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 12:13:00 -0600
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Subject: Re: Kitab-I-Aqdas and other questions
So, of instance, my original post in this thread pointed out some concerns I
have
susan,
in the interest of a certain clarity to the overall issue, which is frimly
Covenantal,
i would like to paraphrase the following fior ur consideration:
;As for which opinions it is acceptable for a Baha'i to hold, I think
the House has made it pretty clear which of Sen's positions they
It does matter, in my opinion, whether knowledgeable Baha'is think my views
and understandings, the very ones that caused me to declare, are within
acceptable norms or not. I have no desire to be a Baha'i whose views are
contrary to what normative
Baha'is are striving to achieve.
Dear
Susan wrote:
Dear Ron,
You'll need to be a bit more specific about which of Sen's opinions
you are talking about. My problem with Sen's views largely concerns
the fact that he so often ignores the authoritative interpretations of
the Guardian (especially if they are conveyed by his
Dear Rich:
Actually, `Abdu'l-Baha did not reverse Himself; it's rather
straightforward if you follow it rather carefully. Here is the thing: as
you know, `Abdu'l-Baha is the Interpreter of Baha'u'llah's mind not
just the Writings of Baha'u'llah; so, `Abdu'l-Baha tells Baha'is that
Baha'u'llah
the following you wrote is the very opposite of anything I have seen
written by Sen or heard him voice, so please provide any evidence
written in Sen's own hand to support your claim here.
Own hand? All we get are bytes out here in cyberspace. But here are
some of his statements in this
If any of the 'reasons' you gave in the posting were the reasons the
House of Justice had or have against Sen's views, I think they would
not be afraid of stating this. They have not.
Actually, they did. But their statements were misrepresented as saying
Baha'is couldn't study theology.
I remember once suggesting that the Bahai faith had a notion of
orthodoxy, or right belief (like certain other religions) using
Sen's disenrollment as an example. But then you had argued it wasn't
so important Sen's issues wasn't so much a matter of mere belief but
had more to do with his
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Subject: Re: from sonja: Kitab-I-Aqdas and other questions
i could think of a good reason, unless the House has openly stated that a
particular individual is the spokesperson for the House, the person speaking
for the House is speaking out
from sonja:
My apologies to maidenleaf and anyone else on this list. My response
to Susan was in an attempt to correct a misrepresentation, nothing
more.
the position that the person writing it has made the correct
representation of what the House stated and the other person has
misrepresented
was maintained
in the process of this whole issuebut that is my stuff and has nothing to
do with anyone else.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 23:48:02 +0100
Subject: from sonja: Kitab-I-Aqdas and other questions
from sonja:
My apologies
Dear Susan,
You wrote:
Dear Ron,
You'll need to be a bit more specific about which of Sen's opinions
you are talking about. My problem with Sen's views largely concerns
the fact that he so often ignores the authoritative interpretations of
the Guardian (especially if they are conveyed by
Iskandar Hai wrote:
Dear Rich:
Actually, `Abdu'l-Baha did not reverse Himself; it's rather
straightforward if you follow it rather carefully. Here is the thing: as
you know, `Abdu'l-Baha is the Interpreter of Baha'u'llah's mind not
just the Writings of Baha'u'llah; so, `Abdu'l-Baha tells
Susan, none of what you mention in the above is of concern to me,
Dear Ron,
That's why you need to be more specific.
I have since become aware that many Baha'is
seem to hold very different views, and instead see it as necessary that the
Baha'i Faith eliminate all other religions eventually.
Long time. Thanks for the web sites. I can appreciate the need to
translate all the writings, but I sometimes wonder if these
commentaries might be more helpful.
Amr wa Khalq is not a book of commentary -- it is collection of
tablets and parts of tablets by Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha,
Ron asked:
Sen, thank you for this opinion.
I find it very close to how I see things. I would like to know the
opinion of others on the list, including Brent Poirier and Dr. Maneck,
about these issues. In particular, I would like to know whether Brent,
Dr. Maneck and others view these kind of
I think this gets to the heart of the matter. Since
I believe things like you express above, Sen, am I a bad Bah'ai (at
least in the eyes of influential and powerful people in the Baha'i
community?) Are my beliefs acceptable? Or must I believe more like I
think most Baha'is these days do
In particular, I would like to
know whether Brent, Dr. Maneck and others view these kind of opinions as
acceptable for a Baha'i to hold.
Dear Ron,
You'll need to be a bit more specific about which of Sen's opinions
you are talking about. My problem with Sen's views largely concerns
the fact
Susan Maneck wrote:
I can appreciate the need to
translate all the writings, but I sometimes wonder if these commentaries
might be more helpful.
Dear Rich,
Personally I don't want to read other people's commentary when I can't
read the original text.
But we do have the text.
Personally I don't want to read other people's commentary when I can't
read the original text.
But we do have the text.
Dear Rich,
Amr va Khalq is a compilation with a lot of commentary. I'd much
prefer to see texts translated in their entirety so we can read them
within context.
Hi Ron,
I think your main questions are about the form and approach of the
Aqdas, about what kind of thing it is, so I'll skip over the more
particular questions about some laws quickly, and then get onto the
broader issues.
Women are given less inheritance, (and if that's of no importance
Sen,
Thanks for that fascinating look inside the Aqdas. in 33 years as a Baha'i I
had not come across the details from the Bayan that you quote. Is there a book
that covers these 'telegraphic pointers' as you call them in some detail or are
these the result of your own research? If its your
Also, i assume these are your views about mutatis mutandis and they
haven't been endorsed by the Universal House of Justice yet?
Everything I write is my own views: idiosyncratic, completely
unauthoritative and not necessarily well founded.
I have thought about writing a commentary on the
ursus,
i would offer u sincerely,
2 pov at the same time about the Aqdas. Most Holy... ok...why?
1. ultimate answer to prayers for Guidance and a REcipe Book... don;t fault
God for what was prayed for, which is always specific.
2. from the specifics come principles above and beyond the
Dear Sen,
I got a lot out of your response to Ron. It does bring up up a couple of
issues for me. Why hasn't the Persian or Arabic Bayan been translated
into English as this might help clarify some issues? Also why have
commentaries on the laws from such collections as Amr Va Khalq not been
Dear Rich,
Denis McEoin did an English translation of the Persian Bayan which you
can find here: http://www.bahai-library.org/provisionals/bayan.html
Also, Ismael Velasco has translated parts of it:
http://bahai-library.com/file.php5?file=bab_bayan_farsi_velasco
Also why have
commentaries on
Yes, the original texts are available:
http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/areprint/bab/A-F/b/bayana/bayana.htm
http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/areprint/bab/A-F/bayanf/bayanf.htm
There are complete French translations, at
http://www.bahai-biblio.org/centre-doc/saint/bayan/bayan-persan-
sommaire.htm
or
Susan Maneck wrote:
Also why have
commentaries on the laws from such collections as Amr Va Khalq not been
translated?
We aren't going to see commentaries being translated when we have yet
to translate all the Writings!
warmest, Susan
Hi Susan,
Long time. Thanks for the web
I can appreciate the need to
translate all the writings, but I sometimes wonder if these commentaries
might be more helpful.
Dear Rich,
Personally I don't want to read other people's commentary when I can't
read the original text.
We've both heard folks say that Abdul-Baha
abrogated bigamy
I really need some help understanding and relating to the Kitab-I-Aqdas.
Given that the Kitab-I-Aqdas is our Most Holy Book, I have read the
Kitab-I-Aqdas dozens of times, since I declared ten years ago. I have
studied it for ten years, much more than I have ever studied any book. I
know it
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ursus Maximus
Sent: 31 December 2007 20:54
To: Baha'i Studies
Subject: Kitab-I-Aqdas and other questions
I really need some help understanding and relating to the Kitab-I-Aqdas.
Given that the Kitab-I-Aqdas is our Most Holy Book
Dear Ron:
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007, Ursus Maximus wrote:
3. Not only does the Aqdas not make the point about equality of the sexes,
but also instead Women are specifically singled out as being treated
inferior to men in more than one instance. Women are given less inheritance,
(and if that's of
Khazeh,
Thank you for your reply. I am studying your words to me.
Ron
On Dec 31, 2007 4:25 PM, khazeh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Ursus Maximus
*Sent:* 31 December 2007 20:54
*To:* Baha'i Studies
*Subject:* Kitab-I-Aqdas
53 matches
Mail list logo
