Rules for Bahai Dating
Serffrr
could find information on the subject.
Thanks
ser...@aol.com
Baha...@aol.com
it isn't permitted, but I haven't been able to find anything in the writings
that states that. I don't know if it's Kitab-i-hearsay or not. It could
possibly be that dating just isn't socially practiced in Iran, and everyone
just assumes that is the Baha'i position. I really would like it if someone
has clarification on the subject, because I have no idea honestly. I have
seen no mention of dating in the writings whatsoever, but courting is
mentioned several times, so does that mean that ipso facto there is no dating
allowed?
Warmest regards
Baha'i Mike
Bart and Lia HOEN
one can "suspect" you of anything untoward..
If getting to know the other's character is a precondition for a sound future
relationship, then you aren't going to get to know it at the back of the movie
theater or in a disco where you can't hear each other speak above the music.
My understanding is that you're only supposed to hold hands to show affection,
and work together on things like service projects, etc. where you can see your
future mate's reaction to adversity and interaction with others. Frightening,
isn't it? :-)
Bart in Cayenne
Fred Capp
FYI: "Courting" happens to be an old word that currently has been replaced
in our culture with the word "Dating". In essence these two words have the same core meaning. "Getting to know somebody well enough to decide if this is the person that one may wish to marry".
The Baha'i teachings are full of references to getting married & the process of "knowing & loving". I would recommend that you try to get a hold of the book "Fortress for Well-Being" which was originally written by Daniel Jordan. The chapters in there on
dating were very helpful for me, they kept me from making a couple of really BAD mistakes. There exists also a compilation entitled "Marriage & Family Life" that has much to recommend it.
The basic rule is to do things, volunteer activities, teaching trips, etc. with your intended (another wonderful old word that has fallen out of the parlance) so as to better discover the person's REAL personality. So many people go into "dating" with th
e intention of impressing somebody & are thus often wasting the very energy needed to really see the other person for whom s/he is.
But this doesn't mean that we can't go to the occasional dance or to the theater sometimes, just don't forget the long talks & the "stress inducing" activities.
Good luck, I hope that everything works out for the best.
Fred Capp
fred...@cupelectric.com
>>> <Baha...@aol.com> 00/07/26 10:33:43 ATM >>>
Glenn A. Peirce
> Does anyone have any advice on rules for Bahai dating
> or where I could find information on the subject.
There are no specific "rules" on Baha'i dating. There are lots of rules
that would tend to imply that there is no such thing as a "Baha'i date"
since a "Baha'i date" would not fit anyone's definition of dating. For
example...
A youth in the Baha'i Class I teach asked if Baha'is can date. I indicated
that a Baha'i can do on a date ANYTHING they would do with their best friend
of the same sex or an opposite sex cousin. The youth indicated that this
would not be dating. I answered that if the definition of a date required
any behavior outside of what I had identified, then maybe Baha'is cannot
date.
Abdu'l-Baha said that Baha'is are not supposed to kiss each other except for
spouses and those "preparing for marriage". The Persian practice of kissing
upon meeting or departing is clearly an indication of greeting and not of
"familiarity".
Because this forum does *not* permit references to direct websites, I am
reprinting the ENTIRE DOCUMENT below, that you may attribute this reference
directly, rather than allow it to fall into the realm of Kitab-i-Hearsay.
The Baha'i Faith has few "specific rules" on many things at all, but it does
have broad paintbrush subjects like Chastity. There is NOTHING that is
depicted on television today that is considered "chaste" in the dating
scenario. If one Baha'i is dating another Baha'i, what are they doing --
behavior wise -- that distinguishes that event from any other social
activity between people? If there is a difference -- in behavior -- then
chances are there is a degree of chastity violation / overlook.
If Abdu'l-Baha said "no" to the kiss, which in the West is how a "chaste"
first date ends, then what aspects of a Western date would fall within the
realm of chastity? The reality is that in the West, dating is not
preparation for marriage. It is an event in and of itself. And the
*majority* of the activities and purposes of dating in the West does not
fall within the Baha'i respect for chastity.
Hope this has muddied the waters for you in a very clear manner!
***** Reference Reprinted *****
This file contains four parts: (1) a 1912 one-page Pilgrim's Note from Ann
Boylan; (2) a 1947 letter from John B. Cornell to the Guardian which, among
other topics, quoted three lines from this Pilgrim's Note; (3) the 1947
response written on behalf of the Guardian to John B. Cornell; (4) a 1974
letter from the Universal House of Justice which quoted the Guardian's
letter to Cornell. Material shared by and posted with permission from
Cornell.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
#1: Pilgrim's Note from Ann Boylan
FROM THE TEACHINGS OF ABDU'L-BAHA
Recorded by Ann M. Boylan
Walking today in the gardens by the Hudson River in the early morning, I had
the privilege of being with Abdu'l-Baha, and I told Him how some people have
tried to spread the untruth that the Baha'is teach "free love."
He answered: "The marriage bond is very important." He repeated it again:
"Very, very important. Marriage must be strict and pure. You must all be
very careful about this." He continued: "Women and men must not embrace each
other when not married, or not about to be married. They must not kiss each
other. If women kiss women, that is not bad. If men kiss men, that is not
bad. But men and women must not embrace. Such conduct is not taught in the
Baha'i Revelation. AND IT MUST NOT BE DONE. IT IS NOT PERMITTED. If they
wish to greet each other, or comfort each other, they may take each other by
the hand. "Describe how you have seen the women of the East, as in Haifa.
The Blessed Beauty directed that there should be great modesty in the women,
that they should not bare the neck and bosom, and that the women in the East
should wear a veil.* "The conditions are different in the West, but the
women of the West must see the spiritual significance of this Teaching. Do
not distress them by saying that they should not have done this or that.
They will see by themselves. Talk about this only, so to speak, one by one,
with the friends, when you have the opportunity."
Notes of a talk with Abdu'l-Baha, New York City, June 7, 1912
*[The meaning of this statement can be understood via reference to this
passage from J.E. Esslemont's Baha'u'llah and the New Era, pp. 149-150: "In
bringing about the emancipation of women as in other matters, Baha'u'llah
counsels His followers to avoid methods of violence. An excellent
illustration of the Baha'i method of social reform has been given by the
Baha'i in Persia, Egypt and Syria. In these countries it is customary for
Muhammadan women outside their homes to wear a veil covering the face. The
Bab indicated that in the New Dispensation women would be relieved from this
irksome restraint, but Baha'u'llah counsels His followers, where no
important question of morality is involved, to defer to established customs
until people become enlightened, rather than scandalize those amongst whom
they live, and arouse needless antagonism. The Baha'i women, therefore,
although well aware that the antiquated custom of wearing the veil is, for
enlightened people, unnecessary and inconvenient, yet quietly put up with
the inconvenience, rather than rouse a storm of fanatical hatred and
rancorous opposition by uncovering their faces in public. This conformity to
custom is in no way due to fear, but to an assured confidence in the power
of education and in the transforming and life-giving effect of true
religion. Baha'is in these regions are devoting their energies to the
education of their children, especially their girls, and to the diffusion
and promotion of the Baha'i ideals, well knowing that as the new spiritual
life grows and spreads among the people, antiquated customs and prejudices
will by and by be shed, as naturally and inevitably as bud scales are shed
in spring when the leaves and flowers expand in the sunshine." -ed.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
#2: Letter from John B. Cornell to The Guardian
Laguna Honda Home
San Francisco 16, California
September 21, 1947
Beloved Shoghi Effendi,
These questions have perplexed me and a number of my fellow-believers:
1. Some of the friends consider that your letter of February 23, 1924, means
that local and national assemblies are infallible, or at least not to be
criticized, even in the business discussions of the 19-Day Feast. If the
assembly decision is "the voice of truth, never to be challenged . . . its
verdict truly inspired," does this mean infallibility, with its implications
of no need for community or other advice and of the heretical nature of any
criticism of an assembly policy or decision?
When `Abdu'l-Baha says that it is better to agree on a subject even though
it be wrong than to disagree and be in the right, does He refer only to
co-ordinating our actions or does He mean (by this and by ". . . if, the
Lord forbid, differences of opinion should arise . . .") that we should also
avoid disagreeing with anyone in assembly or community consultations?
2. Does the desirability of unanimity in assembly decisions imply that a
member with a minority opinion should vote against his conscience? If he
feels very strongly that the other eight members were wrong may he, while
obedient to the majority decision, bring the matter up at a subsequent
assembly meeting and try to persuade the others to his point of view; or
does the instruction to not "object to or censure, whether in or out of the
meeting, a decision arrived at previously" preclude such reconsideration?
Some societies have artificial methods of achieving unanimity, such as
motions "that the secretary be directed to cast a unanimous ballot." Is it
proper, where the "voice of the majority" is regarded as "the voice of
truth, never to be challenged," for an assembly to achieve a unanimous vote
by taking a revote following a majority decision, in which case it is
considered wrong for anyone to vote opposed once the voice of truth has been
discovered and established?
3. Although the principle of chastity has been strongly emphasized, I have
been unable to find any authoritative writings that explain clearly enough
what it means for Baha'is. English dictionaries define chastity as freedom
from unlawful sexual intercourse, and no believer doubts this requirement,
so that free love, companionate marriage, etc., are regarded as wrong.
However, not all can agree on whether any of the forms of sexual activity
which stop short of intercourse are forbidden. A pilgrim's note by Ann
Boylan reports the Master as saying: "Women and men must not embrace each
other when not married, or not about to be married. They must not kiss each
other . . . If they wish to greet each other, or comfort each other, they
may take each other by the hand." Many believers do not know this or do not
believe it. The term, "easy familiarity," is thought by many to mean simply
rudeness and not applicable to invited or accepted demonstrations. Even some
of the most unquestionably loyal follow the Christian custom of "kissing the
bride" at Baha'i weddings. Would you explain for us what our conduct should
be in order to uphold the Baha'i concept of chastity?
Do you give your permission to publication of your answers to the above
questions in "Baha'i News"?
Yours in His service,
(Signed) John Bernard Cornell
John Bernard Cornell
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
#3: Response from the Guardian to John. B. Cornell
Oct. 19, 1947
Dear Baha'i Brother:
Your letter dated Sept. 21st has been received and our beloved Guardian has
instructed me to answer it on his behalf.
Regarding your questions: No. 1. There are only two institutions which are
infallible, one is the guardianship, the other the International House of
Justice. What the Master desired to protect the friends against was
continual bickering and opinionatedness. A believer can ask the Assembly why
they made a certain decision and politely request them to reconsider. But
then he must leave it at that, and not go on disrupting local affairs
through insisting on his own views. This applies to an Assembly member as
well. We all have a right to our opinions, we are bound to think
differently; but a Baha'i must accept the majority decision of his Assembly,
realizing that acceptance and harmony--even if a mistake has been made-- are
the really important things, and when we serve the Cause properly, in the
Baha'i way, God will right any wrongs done in the end.
No. 2. Baha'is are not required to vote on an Assembly against their
consciences. It is better if they submit to the majority view and make it
unanimous. But they are not forced to. What they must do, however, is to
abide by the majority decision, as this is what becomes effective. They must
not go around undermining the Assembly by saying they disagreed with the
majority. In other words, they must put the Cause first and not their own
opinions. He (an S.A. member) can ask the Assembly to reconsider a matter,
but he has no right to force them or create inharmony because they won't
change. Unanimous votes are preferable, but certainly cannot be forced upon
Assembly members by artificial methods such as are used by other societies.
What Baha'u'llah means by chastity certainly does not include the kissing
that goes on in modern society. It is detrimental to the morals of young
people, and often leads them to go too far, or arouses appetites which they
cannot perhaps at the time satisfy legitimately through marriage, and the
suppression of which is a strain on them. The Baha'i standard is very high,
more particularly when compared with the thoroughly rotten morals of the
present world. But this standard of ours will produce healthier, happier,
nobler people, and induce stabler marriages. The Master's words to Ann
Boylan, which you quoted, can certainly be taken as the true spirit of the
teachings on the subject of sex. We must strive to achieve this exalted
standard.
Assuring you of his loving prayers for the success of your Baha'i services.
With warm greetings,
R. Rabbani
P.S. If the N.S.A. wish to publish this in Baha'i News he has no objection.
May the Beloved bless your efforts, guide your steps, and enable you to
promote the best interests of His Faith,
Your true brother
Shoghi
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
#4: Letter from the Universal House of Justice quoting #1 and #3
February 10, 1974
Universal House of Justice
National Spiritual Assembly of the United States
"We have your letter...asking about a Tablet of 'Abdu'l-Baha on the subject
of embracing. We have seen no such Tablet, but we have seen reference to a
pilgrim's note and the comment of the beloved Guardian on it.
"The pilgrim's note reports the Master as saying: 'Women and men must not
embrace each other when not married, or not about to be married. They must
not kiss each other....If they wish to greet each other, or comfort each
other, they may take each other by the hand.'
"In a letter to an individual written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi it is
said: 'The Master's words to..., which you quoted, can certainly be taken as
the true spirit of the teachings on the subject of sex. We must strive to
achieve this exalted standard.'"
(Baha'i National Review, June, 1979, p. 5; partially cited in Lights of
Guidance, pp. 440-441)
John Haukness
links to the writings and there are search engines that use word topic
searches. Just type in dating.
The short answer to get your question started though is Baha'is are told to
not have sex outside of marriage. This of course would then include dating.
So that is the big difference between the Baha'i Faith and current
standards, because of course, in current standard's sex prior to marriage is
considered a part of nature and a free way to live out life to it's
greatest potential.
There are many ramifications and significances we could contemplate over
what would it mean if a person only had sex in marriage as oppossed to what
is promoted as natural, that it's a richer experience to have sex with more
than one person, the more sex the merryer, so to speak.
But, the Baha'i Faith has few rituals. For some Baha'is, the whole concept
of dating, is a diminsihed one, for some of us, myself being one, you
spiritually and in a manner of friendship just try to get as close to others
as you can, there is no restiction on that, the opposite, have as good a
time and get as close to others as you can.
But, if Baha'is are not to have sex outside of marriage, then a natural
question might be, what about precursers to sex? Heavy kissing and pre sex
things. There are few rules on this, it's just more common sense that if
your not suppossed to have sex outside of marriage, then almost sexual
activity is also something not in the Baha'i way.
But if dating means single people going out with people of the opposite sex
and having the most fun and being the closest one can be in a supportive
way, then there is nothing in the Baha'i Faith that say's not to do that.
When one meets someone one is attracted to, and being one should not have
sex to act on that attraction unless one is married, could and does bring up
some basic facts of human nature. See it's not just promiscous people who
are humans, non promiscous people are human too. If your attraction is
great, for many people, I am speaking from my experience and from all the
great books I have read such as Trisdan and Isolde, or Love Story books,
eventually, you have to act. I just saw a really good movie released on this
that mirrors to me, the Baha'i way of life, it's called "Loser." And for
Hollywood, it's refreshing to see a script that has a really nice guy and
girl in the lead roles.
But the thing is, at the end he tells her, I cannot go out with you when you
have another boyfriend. In other words, there is a place in love, where you
either are going to have to get together, or break up, for some of us.
So, in that respect, for Baha'is, when dating get's real real passionate.
For some of us, your going to have to either propose marriage or break up,
because some of us are like Juliet or Romeo, and we can't just be friends
when we are too much in love.
And to that, the Baha'is don't have any rules, it's figure it out on your
own. Au revoir john
-----Original Message-----
> Does anyone have any advice on rules for Bahai dating or
where I
>could find information on the subject.
>
> Thanks
> ser...@aol.com
>
Baha...@aol.com
When would one be considered about to be married? Would that be shortly
before the wedding or once a couple are engaged?
Another thing I would like to know others opinions on, is once a person is in
a relationship where they have kissed someone before before knowing about the
Baha'i stance should they cease and desist? At that point I'm thinking an
American Baha'i might as well just assume only attempt to marry another
Baha'i because for example most non baha'is would feel really hurt if their
Baha'i suitor insisted upon not kissing them until they married. I think it
could even end many relationships. Its kind of an ethical dilemma. These
decisions can be very difficult at times, especially when its not just your
own feelings at stake.
Baha'i Mike
Shel...@aol.com
hauk...@prodigy.net writes:
John wrote,
<< So, in that respect, for Baha'is, when dating gets real real passionate.
For some of us, your going to have to either propose marriage or break up,
because some of us are like Juliet or Romeo, and we can't just be friends
when we are too much in love >>
I think it is an interesting point in that there is a point a couple reaches
where they either get married or break up, in relation to the dynamic of
unity. I see a relation to the Bahai faith law of getting permission from
both families parents in order to get married....as a means of upholding
unity. Although by some logic one could imagine that a couple could have
sex and then break up, and still be very loving towards each other, this is
perhaps, by many of our experiences, or at very least having percieved others
relationships, does not end up this way, often ending in disunity. A point
is here that I think it can be often elusive to our intellect because
generally people would think it logically possible connect through sex,
through what might be perceived as natural human intimacy....as love is
natural or a quality of God, but love I believe, few of us, if any, are fully
grounded within.....it is a rather interesting, and unique phenomena of human
social relationship that such a mystery of where human intimacy is to be with
held.
Along this line, I believe that with holding sex in a relationship until
marriage can force one and their partner to view each others true
selves....as with the Bahai writings saying that through working with your
partner in various situations you perceive each others basic essence or
spiritual self, so to, I believe, that through with holding sex until
marriage allows the same dynamic to develop. Often, if not most often,
people tend to place their loneliness and unmet needs upon another when the
sex becomes a factor...atleast there is this tendency, and not that one
doesn't place their unmet needs on another before sex exists in a
relationship....people place their unmet on each other all the time, such an
argument with a family member or friend, and this does reveal where they are
emotionally/spiritually. If sex enters the equation though I believe unmet
needs or atleast exceptions are placed even more so. I truly believe that
if one contradicts their desire to reach the heavy intimacy of a sexual
relationship by not allowing sex to play into the relationship, one can
reveal to themselves who they are, as well as get a clearer picture of who
the other is. A simple example is that one may tend to handle relationships
by disguising there true feelings by being overly talkative, or perhaps not
talkative and silent....and thereby sex is a means of immediately reaching a
level of intimacy one thinks is in ones best interest. With this example, if
sex is with held, and the relationship is allowed to evolve by other means,
one can face up to what might be a crutch of being overly talkative (say to
control a situation) or nontalkative (say because one has inhibitions about
particular things). The desire to have sexual intimacy can certainly be
strong when one is enamored with another....and to not be sexual is almost
painful, but is does it not appear the same way when one attempts to curtail,
for example, their anger, jealousy, or some addictive behavior...its a matter
of not giving in which I think leads to epiphany.
I think that when one finds another attractive the tendency is to idealize
the other person.....shes so this!....hes so that!... and objectivity is
often lost. So if sex enters the relationship in the early stages, then one
can go through a disillusionment period which later ends in disunity....unmet
needs, which, existed in the first place. It is so often seen, the bliss of
entering into a relationship, only to end with each partner saying he/she
doesn't care about me this way, or he/she has these problems. Although this
seems like a rather obvious statement which we have perceived in human
relationships, I believe that it does point out the initial condition in
which we enter a relationship in the first place.
A small note; I do not believe in all cases that physical contact (excluding
sex) among those who are dating is necessarily an action which should be with
held from a relationship. Human touch is a tremendous blessing, but I think
just as with sex, one should be careful and thoughtful as to where they
themselves and their partner stand with human touch. What might be simply be
a hug or a shoulder message to one might be something completely different to
another....if it is undoubtedly clear to each other that each person does not
connect this action to sex, then I believe this to be totally fine. The key,
I believe, is simply taking ones time in getting to know another.
derek
dmcadam
Dear Fred-
I agree with your suggestion and advice in the following-
> I would recommend that you try to get a hold of the book "Fortress for
>Well-Being" which was originally written by Daniel Jordan. The chapters in
>there on
> dating were very helpful for me, they kept me from making a couple of
>really BAD mistakes.
However I would like to point out this book was part of the Comprehensive
Deepening Program (CDP)that was based on the earlier work of Marian Crist
Lippitt who wrote the Fortress of Well Being. Dan Jordan was the
supervisor of the entire project. I happen to be a Board Member of the
non-profit organization, The Foundation for the Investigation of Reality
located in Eliot, ME that is devoted to preserving and protecting the
Master Index of the Baha'i Writings (over 300,000 quotes) that Marian
almost singlehandedly produced over a 35 year period. We are Custodians
of the Index with a mandate to have it computerized. I scanned the
entire CDP some time ago and we are in process of its editing and
reformatting prior to submission for Baha'i Review with a goal of having
it reprinted. It is a valuable deepening and transformation tool in our
opinion. I could send excerpts, maybe even a chapter or two on special
subjects if anyone wishes me to send first the entire Chapter headings.
Regarding dating, I believe this is a purely Western practice that was
devised during the second world war. My feeling is that the Writings
call for male and females to work together in service to the Cause and in
this way discover their spiritual and emotional maturity in preparedness
for marriage. The problem now is that our society does not recognize an
adult as being fit for marriage and responsibility until legal age or
when a person has acquired college credentials. Just imagine the fact
that maturity begins at age 15 when a person is physically capable of
having children but our society goes against nature by asking us to wait
until we are graduated from college and able to successfully and
financially provide for a family. How does one pass such a test for in
our society sex is literally predominate in almost all media and ways of
life. Our attitudes and understanding about sex is very immature in my
opinion, why we even use the four letter work describing the love act as
a swear word or something in which to exress our debasement of another
person or their ideas.
I recall Dan Jordan saying, in one of his ANISA presentations that
children could be doing post graduate work at the age of 15 if their
previous academic and spiritual training was based on a holistic model of
education, such as ANISA and the Science of Reality (Marian Lippitt's
work). But he was concerned that society was not ready to have this kind
of maturity in youth for our laws would have to be changed dramatically
to facilitate their progress.
I believe that if two Baha'i youth (male and female) were to be faithful
to the Covenant, striving daily in its obedience, working together on
teaching projects, they would soon discover their compatibility and make
a well informed selection. But to follow the dictates of the media
prompted feelings concerning dating, sex, etc. they will find it most
difficult to sustain a spiritual union which includes physical, emotional
and mental compatibility, cooperation and maturity. Actually I have
heard from several male youth that their choice to avoid sex, drugs,
alcohol etc. has made them more attractive to the opposite sex and
increased their tests in this area. So it is a most difficult situation
we have forced on our youth by not preparing them for adulthood in a
holistic manner. And this brings up another issue, that of parental
permission.
In the Writings is states that parents must be assured of the spiritual
and emotional maturity of the youth requesting permission to marry. My
wife and I had four children and found it difficult to assess the
spiritual and emotional condition of our teenagers. They were like most
teenagers even though three were Baha'is. So we had them all read the
Fortress of Well Being together with their selected mates. None of their
marriages worked out. In fact one daughter was married three times by
the age of 23. They grew up as Baha'is, had plenty of solid deepening
and my wife and I have always been very active in the Faith. If a
teenager is attending Feast, giving to the Fund, studying and praying
etc. then we figured they are spiritually mature. But emotional
maturity is difficult because, as you know, teenagers are struggling with
these things for several years and marriage was appealing since they felt
they could not wait until they graduated in order to fulfill their
natural sex drives. It is a real problem.
In the old world there are marriages made in heaven where couples get
along fine for their entire adult lives. In the new world we have the
same thing. The percentage of divorce is the same in both worlds. I
think we can just do the best we can with what development we have and
leave matters in God's Hands for we certainly are not going to see all
our social systems, laws, etc. dramatically change in a few years to
accomodate the new enlightenment. Unless, of course, we all fulfill our
requirement to bring one soul into the Faith each year in which case our
numbers would double each year. This certainly would cause great changes
in society very rapidly.
warm regards,
doug
John Haukness
the engagement. Although, the short engagement period Bahaullah prescribed I
still think does not apply to the west, but I may be wrong on that as more
of Bahaullah's Laws were made applicable recently. So, if one has the
traditional western 2 year engagement period, that doesn't seem like almost
married to me, but it still is significant anytime one get's engaged,
whether it follows Bahuallah's Law of a 95 day or shorter engagement, or
follows the western tradition of more than a year.
As far as kissing goes, I think your intutions is right on target. I see not
kissing prior to marriage, as a guideline and not as a Law. And I also see
it not only as a guideline but as a flexible guideline. So, if one of the
persons was expecting kissing to confirm the sincerity, or expecting as a
form of confirmation, and not looking at kissing as a way to have pre
marital sex, then I think each Baha'i takes kissing as a guideling and not
as a Law. I can see reasons not to kiss and because of the guideline then it
makes sense to me, to use holding hands as the means of expressing closeness
and itimacy. But maybe that as you note won't satisfy everyone. I don't
think we have a Baha'i Law we cannot kiss prior to marriage. Guess one would
have to write to the Universal House of Justice or International Teaching
center if you wanted to authoratively know if refraining from kissing is a
general guideline applicable already to everyone or what it is. But then you
also probably have to ask, kissing as a greeting verses passionate long
erotic kissing, I don't think those two are the same thing. Greeting kissing
Baha'is can do. But for me, common sense tells me, there is all kinds of
cultural interpritations to a greeting kissing and a long list of inbetween
connotations of kissing inbetween the greeting short kiss and the long
erotic kiss. What is in between I don't know authoratively. And for some,
probably it's all black and white, you cannot ever kiss in a greeting, or
anything. But I won't buy that line of suggestion., au revoir j
Fred Capp
Actually, I knew, but had forgotten the connection between Ms. Lippett & Dr.
Jordan.
If you could provide me with some data on the ANISA project, which
otherwise seems to have died with Dr. Jordan I would be grateful.
Sorry about your kids marriages. I won't offer suggestions that you've
probably already heard.
Fred Capp
fred...@cupelectric.com
Look at that epitaph: "too busy to have fun."
I trust it's not mine.
>>> dmcadam <dmc...@pionet.net> 00/07/29 5:30:52 PTM >>>