The Baha'i Studies Listserv
As I said, I was trying to wrap up and I am reluctant to make detailed comments about the following. It looks like Matt Haase understood at least some of the points I made. Gilberto either didn't understand or misunderstood my comments. But I'm reluctant to try to clarify and reclarify again and again. However, I find Gilberto's comment about the Baha'i understanding of the issue of finality (Seal of the Prophets, etc.) and his reference to Baha'i "metaphysical obfuscation" very unhelpful and insulting. He owes an apology to the Baha'is on this list. The concept is very lucid, coherent, rational, in full agreement with the general theme and thrust of all religions and Sacred Scriptures, and there is no obfuscation. For me as a Baha'i, the idea that at some point in time (e.g., in 632) God decided to go into permanent retirement and leave humanity to its own devices forever, with-holding His grace and bounty forever, is unacceptable and far from His loving kindness, justice, and mercy. This is a discussion list and nobody is proselytizing Gilberto or anyone else because proselytizing is prohibited in the Baha'i Faith. Gilberto is here on his own accord and he can leave anytime he wants. (Actually, a few years ago, he was asked to leave this list and Susan told him that he was no longer welcome here). At any rate, nobody is proselytizing him here. Best regards, Iskandar Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry® -----Original Message----- From: Gilberto Simpson <gilberto.simp...@gmail.com> Sender: <bounce-511148-2080...@list.jccc.edu>Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 04:06:42 To: Baha'i Studies<bahai-st@list.jccc.edu> Reply-To: "Baha'i Studies" <bahai-st@list.jccc.edu> Subject: Re: Respect for Islam (was: Re: Ablutions The Baha'i Studies Listserv On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:43 AM, <iskandar....@gmail.com> wrote: > The Baha'i Studies Listserv > > > > Well, you know guys, this whole thing is rather funny: I pointed out that > there definitely is a major difference about this "najas" issue in that > whereas the Quran 9:28 clearly and explicitly says some folks are "najas", Yes, except that most Muslims don't read the texts the way you do. >this whole concept just does not exist in the Baha'I Faith at all. Yes, except for how there are ritual ablutions before prayer. Commandments to pray in unsullied clothes on a clean surface, preferably after bathing in rosewater. Different rules for menstruating women. And except for warnings that certain individuals have spiritual diseases and shunning covenant breakers. >Then we moved to more common ground, which I think is more positive and more >fruitful. Now, the emphasis is on differences, again. Do I really need to >remind you that you and I belong to two different religions? I honestly don't know where you are coming from. What did I say to make you think I think you are Muslim? > Isn't it better to build bridges and build on common ground than emphasize the differences? Yes, I often do that. MY sense is that Bahais want to assert the differences > Heck, there are very real and very major and irreconcilable differences > between Shi`ah and Sunni. Shall I recount them for you? I prefer not to. I think you are radically exaggerating the differences and there is still a large amount of common ground. But still I'm not sure what you are trying to say. > No, we Baha'is do not go out of our way to invite a non-Baha'i to our 19-day > feast. It is quite uninteresting for a non-Baha'i, but if you as a non-Baha'i > want to attend it, you are welcome and you will not be barred. I honestly and without being facetious I think you specifically would be a gracious host if I just came and showed up. But based on the numerous letters from Shoghi Effendi and the UHJ which were in the link I gave it is abundantly that the Feasts are meant to be exclusively for Bahais. It's not just that it is boring but the Bahais would need to have a safe space to discuss all sorts of issues which they don't necessarily want aired in front of outsiders. And like I said earlier that is a valid need which I respect. But it IS exclusive. Also in terms of Mecca, even though entry by non-Muslim is NOT a religious question of ritual purity, in the US on multiple occasions you have pundits and politicians "joking" about nuking the Kaaba. I'm sure the same has been said elsewhere. And even under the status quo a few decades ago there was a siege of the Kaaba during Hajj and if you go back several centuries the Black Stone was even stolen for a time. It's not a tourist attraction like Disneyland. Why should everybody be able to go? >I cannot get the directive for you right now from my cell phone; but if you >really need it, I can get it for you. Or, Susan can get it > for you. I'd love to go on pilgrimage to Mecca as a non-Muslim but the Saudi > government won't permit that. And I suspect they will >not listen to Gilberto > or Matt telling them otherwise. Do I begrudge or hate Muslims for not letting > me visit the Kaabah? No, of >course not. If that were really really true, then I'm confused about why you are bringing it up? > > Regarding the issue of Seal of the Prophets, my conclusion is that > Baha'u'llah's reading and interpretation of this whole issue of finality is > the most profound understanding of the term. I disagree but you are entitled to your opinion. We Baha'is certainly do believe in Islam and in the Quran in a manner that is totally unacceptable by a Christian or a Jew or a Zoroastrian person. I'm not sure what you mean exactly by emphasizing "unacceptable".For example the Catholic (arguably heretical) scholar Hans Kung has said he believes that Muhammad is a prophet. Actually I knew a Catholic women who used to live in what used to be my building who said she expected Muhammad and Jesus would both have an exalted and honored place in the afterlife. I know some Jews assert that Islam (and arguably Christianity) was the means God chose to spread knowledge of Himself to Gentiles around the world and so in that sense Muhammad (saaws) was a prophet. > Of course we have a different hermeneutic, and a different reading of the > Quran. There is a major and irreconcilable difference between the Shi`ah > understanding of "people in authority" in Quran 4:59 and the Sunni > understanding of the verse. For a Shi`ah the first 3 Caliphs were simply > illegitimate and usurpers of `Ali's right to be the infallible successor to > the Prophet and the interpreter of the Quran. > > I prefer to dwell on commonalities and de-emphasize the differences. But I > think I'm going to stop posting any more comments. > I'm not sure what your point is. Zaydis are group of Shiah (prominent in Yemen) who actually don't believe what you assert. They believe that Ali should have been the first Imam but they accept that the first 3 caliphs were sincerely mistaken and didn't conspire against anyone. And I'm sure I'm mentioned before that even in Sunni sources, Sunnis are supposed to love Ahl al-Bayt. And especially according to a Sunni Sufi framework, the 12 imams were still among the companions and the awliya and some reached the station of Insan al-Kamil and the Qutbs of their time. So again, I'm not sure what you are saying when in one breath you say you want to dwell on commonalities but in another try to talk about divisions between Muslims. What are you trying to say/accomplish? > > Best regards, > > Iskandar > > > > > > Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry® > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gilberto Simpson <gilberto.simp...@gmail.com> > Sender: <bounce-511021-2080...@list.jccc.edu>Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:56:44 > To: Baha'i Studies<bahai-st@list.jccc.edu> > Reply-To: "Baha'i Studies" <bahai-st@list.jccc.edu> > Subject: Re: Respect for Islam (was: Re: Ablutions > > The Baha'i Studies Listserv > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:43 AM, <iskandar....@gmail.com> wrote: >> The Baha'i Studies Listserv >> >> >> Much thanks, dear Gilberto for your comments. >> >> Baha'is believe that Muhammad is the last Prophet in the same sense that >> Jesus, Moses, and Baha'u'llah are the last Prophet. And the first Prophet. >> It's all explained in Baha'u'llah's "Book of Certitude" and in Khazeh's >> paper. > > I've read Khazeh's paper and parts of the Book of Certitude. I know > what you are saying. I don't want to argue about it. All I'm saying is > that this is definitely not the ordinary meaning of the word "last". > And it isn't what Muslims mean by "last". And when I'm feeling > uncharitable I would just say it is dishonest. But otherwise I think > it is a sincerely believed paradox. > >> Baha'is believe that Jesus was the Son of God in the same sense that Moses, >> Muhammad, you, and me are Sons of God. The uniqueness of Christ was not that >> He was fatherless and conceived of the Holy Spirit. The uniqueness of Jesus >> is because He was the Word, the Logos, the Primal Will; it's because He was >> a lamp from which the unique light of "haqiqat muhammadiyyah" was shining. >> In other words, Baha'is believe that He was as unique as Moses, Muhammad, >> Baha'u'llah, Adam, Noah, Buddha, Zoroaster, and the Bab. > > I personally think that the concept of Haqiqat Muhammadiyyah / Logos > is a powerful tool for reconciling *some* claims about the status of > Jesus (as) and Muhammad (as). (e.g. Arian Christians and Muslims). But > at the end of the day, Bahais read the Quran in ways which are > radically different enough for me to say they don't believe it. (Most > obviously when it comes to rejecting its commandments). > > >> Regarding the 19-day feast: it is open to non-Baha'is. During the >> consultation period of the 19-day feast, if a vote is going to be taken, >> then the votes of Baha'is are counted, naturally. > > http://bahai-library.com/compilations/feast.html > > The above link is a compilation of different directives about the > Feast from Shoghi Effendi and the UHJ and all of section 6 is about > restrictions on Feast attendance. It is pretty clear that non-Bahais > aren't supposed to be invited and their presence at Feasts is to be > avoided. If they are there anyway, the administrative portion of the > meeting is to be postponed. > > Now, I actually don't see anything wrong with that. I totally > understand that a community might want to have opportunities to > discuss issues among themselves without prying eyes. But don't pee on > my leg and tell me its raining. > It is obviously a form of exclusion. > >__________________________________________________ > You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:iskandar....@gmail.com > Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:leave-511021-20805...@list.jccc.edu > Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to ly...@list.jccc.edu > Or subscribe: > http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st > Baha'i Studies is available through the following: > Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu > Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/?forum=bahai-st > News (on-campus only) - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st > Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai...@list.jccc.net > New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu > >__________________________________________________ > You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:%%emailaddr%% > Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:%%email.unsub%% > Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to ly...@list.jccc.edu > Or subscribe: > http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st > Baha'i Studies is available through the following: > Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu > Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/?forum=bahai-st > News (on-campus only) - news://list.jccc.edu/%%list.name%% > Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai...@list.jccc.net > New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu __________________________________________________ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:iskandar....@gmail.com Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:leave-511148-20805...@list.jccc.edu Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to ly...@list.jccc.edu Or subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/?forum=bahai-st News (on-campus only) - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai...@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu __________________________________________________ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:%%emailaddr%% Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:%%email.unsub%% Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to ly...@list.jccc.edu Or subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/?forum=bahai-st News (on-campus only) - news://list.jccc.edu/%%list.name%% Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai...@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
