Covenant
Suzanne
There has been some discussion about the Covenant on this forum, and I
thought it was such an important subject, it deserves its own thread.
Two different Covenants are spoken of in the Baha'i Faith. One is the
Eternal Covenant of God, and the other is the Lesser Covenant.
A covenant is a pact or agreement between two parties. The eternal
Covenant is, according to my understanding, the Covenant that God made
with humanity that whenever humanity loses its way, spiritually
speaking, God will send us His Messengers -- the Founders of the
world's great religions -- to give us fresh guidance from Him. In
return, when a new Messenger comes, then we are to accept them
wholeheartedly and strive to put their teachings into practice in our
lives. This form of Covenant is a constant in the Religion of God,
and is repeated from age to age. There is always a promise of a
return or another Messenger in a subsequent age to give us more of
God's guidance. Like all the Founders of religions gone before,
Baha'u'llah made a covenant with His followers to accept the next
Manifestation of God. He said He would not come before the passing of
a full thousand years.
Unlike other Founders of other religions, Baha'u'llah made a firm
Covenant with His followers regarding His successor who is not a
Messenger of God, but the person who was to lead His own Faith after
His passing. This is what is unique, and will keep this Faith from
splintering into sects.
What are some of the features of the Covenant of Baha'u'llah, and how
will it preserve the unity of the Faith, and ultimately, help to bring
about the unification of the whole human race?
This is an interesting quote from 'Abdu'l-Baha about this:
"...the power of the Covenant will protect the Cause of Baha'u'llah
from the doubts of the people of error. It is the fortified fortress
of the Cause of God and the firm pillar of the religion of God. Today
no power can conserve the oneness of the Baha'i world save the
Covenant of God; otherwise differences like unto a most great tempest
will encompass the Baha'i world. It is evident that the axis of the
oneness of the world of humanity is the power of the Covenant and
nothing else. Had the Covenant not come to pass, had it not been
revealed from the Supreme Pen and had not the Book of the Covenant,
like unto the ray of the Sun of Reality, illuminated the world, the
forces of the Cause of God would have been utterly scattered and
certain souls who were the prisoners of their own passions and lusts
would have taken into their hands an axe, cutting the root of this
Blessed Tree. Every person would have pushed forward his own desire
and every individual aired his own opinion! Notwithstanding this
great Covenant, a few negligent souls galloped with their chargers
into the battlefield, thinking perchance they might be able to weaken
the foundation of the Cause of God: but praise be to God all of them
were afflicted with regret and loss, and erelong they shall see
themselves in poignant despair. Therefore, in the beginning the
believers must make their steps firm in the Covenant so that the
confirmations of Baha'u'llah may encircle them from all sides, the
cohorts of the Supreme Concourse may become their supporters and
helpers, and the exhortations and advices of Abdu'l-Baha, like unto
the pictures engraved on stone, may remain permanent and ineffaceable
in the tablets of all hearts.
(`Abdu'l-Baha: Tablets of the Divine Plan, Pages: 51-52)
How do you understand the above?
Best wishes,
Suzanne
Baha'i
always God's part and our part. You have first mentioned the Greater
Covenant of God, where He promises to send Manifestations and promises
to guide them; and He extracts from us a promise to accept them.
Those are the two parts of the Greater Covenant. I think that this
Covenant is symbolically referred to in the Story of Joseph, where the
brothers of Joseph ask their father to give them Joseph, and they
promise to take care of Him.
"And his brethren went to feed their father's flock in Shechem. And
Israel said unto Joseph, Do not thy brethren feed the flock in
Shechem? come, and I will send thee unto them. And he said to him,
Here am I. And he said to him, Go, I pray thee, see whether it be well
with thy brethren, and well with the flocks; and bring me word again."
(Genesis 37:12-14)
"They said, "O our Father! why dost thou not entrust us with Joseph?
indeed we mean him well. Send him with us to-morrow that he may enjoy
himself and sport: we will surely keep him safely." (Qur'an 12:11)
An expression of this Greater Covenant is Baha'u'llah's promise of the
next Manifestation of God, and the Covenant He makes with His
followers to accept that Manifestation at that time. I personally
think that the Tablets of the Bab to the Letters of the Living, which
are in the International Archives, all perfectly preserved; were sent
by the Bab to Baha'u'llah, as an expression of the Bab's Covenant
recognizing Baha'u'llah. That is, the Bab was giving His followers to
Baha'u'llah, it was an expression of recognition and submission.
The Lesser Covenant is first expressed as you have said, that Abdu'l-
Baha is the one to turn to. This Covenant is primarily in the Kitab-i-
Ahd; and is also contained in the Aqdas verse quoted in that Tablet;
and alsocontained in the Tablet of the Branch, and a few other tablets
quoted in the Dispensation. (WOB 132-136) In these, we see both the
promise to guide Him, made explicit in the Master's explanation of
these verses (Promulgation p. 323); and in the promise we make, to
turn to Him, explicit in the Kitab-i-Ahd and in the Aqdas. This is the
unprecedented Covenant-- never before has the successor been
identified by name in writing. (At the time, Abdu'l-Baha was known as
"The Most Mighty Branch" -- the name "Abdu'l-Baha" did not yet exist,
and was not used during Baha'u'llah's lifetime).
In addition, the Lesser Covenant consists of Abdu'l-Baha's Covenant to
turn to the twin institutions of the Universal House of Justice and
the Guardian. Shoghi Effendi emphasizes the importance of what he
terms "...the twin Covenants of Bahá'u'lláh and of 'Abdu'l-
Bahá..." (Shoghi Effendi, Citadel of Faith, p. 76)
Shoghi Effendi also writes (and "they" refers to Baha'u'llah and
Abdu'l-Baha:)
"They have also, in unequivocal and emphatic language, appointed those
twin institutions of the House of Justice and of the Guardianship as
their chosen Successors, destined to apply the principles, promulgate
the laws, protect the institutions, adapt loyally and intelligently
the Faith to the requirements of progressive society, and consummate
the incorruptible inheritance which the Founders of the Faith have
bequeathed to the world."
(Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 19)
That is, the Covenant as we normally speak of it, refers to the
Covenant of Successorship -- i.e. who is the Head of the Faith; the
promise to guide Him, and the exchanged promise to follow Him.
Baha'u'llah's Covenant is to turn to the Master; the Master's Covenant
is to turn to the House of Justice and the Guardian. These are "twin"
Covenants, and ultimately, the House of Justice is the successor to
both Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha.
The Covenant of Abdu'l-Baha directs the believers to turn to these
twin institutions, and promises that God will guide them. These are
the two halves of Abdu'l-Baha's Covenant:
"O my loving friends! After the passing away of this wronged one, it
is incumbent upon the Aghsan (Branches), the Afnan (Twigs) of the
Sacred Lote-Tree, the Hands (pillars) of the Cause of God and the
loved ones of the Abha Beauty to turn unto Shoghi Effendi -- the
youthful branch branched from the two hallowed and sacred Lote-Trees
and the fruit grown from the union of the two offshoots of the Tree of
Holiness, -- as he is the sign of God, the chosen branch, the Guardian
of the Cause of God, he unto whom all the Aghsan, the Afnan, the Hands
of the Cause of God and His loved ones must turn. He is the
Interpreter of the Word of God and after him will succeed the first-
born of his lineal descendants.
"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). Whatsoever they decide
is of God. Whoso obeyeth him not, neither obeyeth them, hath not
obeyed God; whoso rebelleth against him and against them hath rebelled
against God; whoso opposeth him hath opposed God; whoso contendeth
with them hath contended with God; whoso disputeth with him hath
disputed with God; whoso denieth him hath denied God; whoso
disbelieveth in him hath disbelieved in God; whoso deviateth,
separateth himself and turneth aside from him hath in truth deviated,
separated himself and turned aside from God. May the wrath, the fierce
indignation, the vengeance of God rest upon him! The mighty stronghold
shall remain impregnable and safe through obedience to him who is the
Guardian of the Cause of God. It is incumbent upon the members of the
House of Justice, upon all the Aghsan, the Afnan, the Hands of the
Cause of God to show their obedience, submissiveness and subordination
unto the Guardian of the Cause of God, to turn unto him and be lowly
before him. He that opposeth him hath opposed the True One, will make
a breach in the Cause of God, will subvert His Word and will become a
manifestation of the Center of Sedition." (The Will and Testament of
Abdu'l-Baha, p. 11)
That second paragraph contains the promise that God will guide the
Guardian and the House of Justice ("are both under the care and
protection of the Abha Beauty, [Baha'u'llah] under the shelter and
unerring guidance of the Exalted One" [the Bab]). This is God's
promise -- His part of the Covenant -- to guide the Guardian and the
House of Justice. Our part of the Master's Covenant is to "turn" and
to "obey" not to "rebel" or "oppose" or "contend" or "dispute with" or
"deny" or "disbelieve in" or "deviate" or "separate" from "or "turn
aside" from the House of Justice and the Guardian.
The closing words of the Master's Will -- His very last guidance to
the human race -- is again, His Covenant, His solemn directive to us
to follow His Successors:
"All must seek guidance and turn unto the Center of the Cause and the
House of Justice. And he that turneth unto whatsoever else is indeed
in grievous error. The Glory of Glories rest upon you!" (The Will and
Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 25)
I have posted a number of items about the various aspects of the
Covenant on this blog: http://bahai-covenant.blogspot.com
Brent
Suzanne
Hi Brent,
Thanks for your thorough explanations.
How does the Lesser Covenant create unity and prevent the Faith from
breaking up into sects?
Suzanne
Suzanne
Suzanne
.. I think that this
> Covenant is symbolically referred to in the Story of Joseph, where the
> brothers of Joseph ask their father to give them Joseph, and they
> promise to take care of Him.
Yes. Interesting. I'd never thought of that as being about the
Covenant. Of course they don't take care of Him, but then humanity
never does take care of their Messengers.
It's more explicit in the Qur'an:
"Certainly We made a covenant with the children of Israel and We sent
to them apostles; whenever there came to them an apostle with what
that their souls did not desire, some (of them) did they call liars
and some they slew."
- Qur'an 5:70
And the Bab is also very explicit about it:
"THOU beholdest how vast is the number of people who go to Mecca
each year on pilgrimage and engage in circumambulation, while He,
through the potency of Whose Word the Ka'bah [the sanctuary in Mecca]
hath become the object of adoration, is forsaken in this mountain. He
is none other but the Apostle of God Himself, inasmuch as the
Revelation of God may be likened to the sun. No matter how
innumerable its risings, there is but one sun, and upon it depends the
life of all things. It is clear and evident that the object of all
preceding Dispensations hath been to pave the way for the advent of
Muhammad, the Apostle of God. These, including the Muhammadan
Dispensation, have had, in their turn, as their objective the
Revelation proclaimed by the Qa'im. The purpose underlying this
Revelation, as well as those that preceded it, has, in like manner,
been to announce the advent of the Faith of Him Whom God will make
manifest. And this Faith - the Faith of Him Whom God will make
manifest - in its turn, together with all the Revelations gone before
it, have as their object the Manifestation destined to succeed it.
And the latter, no less than all the Revelations preceding it, prepare
the way for the Revelation which is yet to follow. The process of the
rise and setting of the Sun of Truth will thus indefinitely continue -
a process that hath had no beginning and will have no end.
(The Bab: Selections from the Bab, Pages: 105-106)
I think the Greater Covenant is more easily understood than the Lesser
Covenant. Why do you think that God didn't choose to make a specific
Covenant about successorship until this Dispensation? Wouldn't it
have solved a lot of problems for their to have been a clear Covenant
around successorship in the time of Christ or Muhammad?
Best wishes,
Suzanne
Douglas McAdam
While on this subject I was prompted to recall an old booklet I have
called The Covenant and Administration. I wonder if this or anything
like it has since been published. It dealt with the Greater and
Lesser Covenants showing quotes from previous religions too.
Here is an excerpt I found -
The Covenant and Administration
I. THE GREAT OR "ANCIENT" COVENANT OF GOD
Since time immemorial God has covenanted with His people that He
Would not leave them to themselves alone but would send them Teachers
or Prophets with unerring guidance to assist and help them, to lead
them to True knowledge and to show them the path of nearness to Him.
This is the Great Covenant, the Ancient Covenant of God through which
God has unfailingly released His regenerating Power, which has
recreated all things and which has educated man enabling him to build
an ever-advancing civilization. Each of His Manifestations in turn has
always foretold the Prophet or Teacher to come after Him.,
"The golden thread of the Covenant runs through and connects the
religious Dispensations of the past. The Old Testament means the Old
Covenant: the New Testament means the New Covenant."
Study Outline on the Covenant (1948), p. 12.
"God's purpose in sending His Prophets unto men is twofold. The first
is to liberate the children of men from the darkness of ignorance, and
guide them to the light of true understanding. The second is to ensure
the peace and tranquility of mankind, and to provide all the means by
which they can be established."
Gl., pp. 79-80.
A. THE COVENANTS OF GOD REGARDING SUCCESSION OF HIS PROPHETS
"Every Prophet Whom the Almighty and Peerless Creator hath purposed to
send to the peoples of the earth hath been entrusted with a Message,
and charged to act in a manner that would best meet the requirements
of the age in which He appeared." Gl , p. 79.
The following are a few of numerous references containing the
Covenants of God regarding the succession of Prophets to be sent to
the world to renew His everlasting Covenant and to guide men to the
light of understanding. (From World Order
Magazine, Vol. VIII, p. 32.)
ADAM Gen. II: 15-17
NOAH Gen. VI: 18, IX: 8-17
ABRAHAM Gen, XV: 18, XVII: 1-9, XXII: 17-18
I Chron. XVI: 15-25
Acts III: 25
Psalms CV: 9-10
Qur'an II: 118-130, p. 350 (Rodwell's Trans»)
PromuIg.U.P. , pa 356
a - Isaac renews - Gen« XVII:
18-22, XXVI: 2-5
b - Jacob renews - Gen. XXVIII:
11-22
MOSES Exodus XIX: 1-6, XXIV: 1-18, XXXI: 16,
III: 15
Deuto IX: 15
Qur'an II: 77, p. 346 (Rodwell)
a - Joshua renews -
Joshua I: 1-9
b - David renews -
Psalms LXXXIX: 3-5, 19-37
II. Sam. XXIII: 1-5
c - Jeremiah renews - Jer, XI: 1-8
JESUS Heb, XII: 24, VIII: 5-13
MUHAMMAD Qur'an IV: 57-83, pp. 417-420
(Rodwell)
I. THE GREAT COVENANT (Cont'd)
A. The Covenants of God regarding His Prophets (Cont'd)
The BAB P. fc M. , pp. 128-1Z9, 306, 85-86
W.O.B., p. 126
BAHA'U'LLAH Gl., pp, 127-128. 331-332
W.O.B., p. 137
P. & M., p. 284
Tablets of Baha'u'llah, p. 113
God bless,
doug
Douglas McAdam
On Dec 2, 2009, at 3:17 PM, Suzanne wrote:
Hi Suzanne-
Here is another interesting quote I found-
192. Today, the Lord of Hosts is the defender of the Covenant, the
forces of the Kingdom protect it, heavenly souls tender their
services, and heavenly angels promulgate and spread it broadcast. If
it is considered with insight, it will be seen that all the forces of
the universe, in the last analysis serve the Covenant. In the future
it shall be made evident and manifest. --'Abdu'l-Baha, Selections from
the Writings of Abdu'l-Baha, page 228
Just imagine, here we have the Beloved Master as , the Exemplar, the
Interpreter and also the Center of the Covenant to which all the
forces of the universe are subservient.
regards,
doug
>
>
>
>
Suzanne
> Hi friends-
> While on this subject I was prompted to recall an old booklet I have
> called The Covenant and Administration. I wonder if this or anything
>
> like it has since been published. It dealt with the Greater and
> Lesser Covenants showing quotes from previous religions too.
> Here is an excerpt I found -
Hi Doug,
I haven't seen anything like it. You concentrate in this posting
mostly on the Greater Covenant.
I would agree that's extremely important -- especially on a forum
like this where (hopefully) there are non-BAha'is reading who haven't
heard this concept before. And when you really start looking, you see
that this Covenant -- the fact that God will not leave us comfortless
but will send His Messengers to educate us -- is found in all the
religions in one form or another. Sometimes it's explicit and
sometimes it's implicit. Here's one example that I found when I
searched for "covenant" in the Bible:
"Be ye mindful always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to
a thousand generations; 16:16 Even of the covenant which he made with
Abraham, and of his oath unto Isaac; 16:17 And hath confirmed the same
to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant, 16:18
Saying, Unto thee will I give the land of Canaan, the lot of your
inheritance; 16:19 When ye were but few, even a few, and strangers in
it.
16:20 And when they went from nation to nation, and from one kingdom
to another people; 16:21 He suffered no man to do them wrong: yea, he
reproved kings for their sakes, 16:22 Saying, Touch not mine anointed,
and do my prophets no harm. (1 Chronicles 16:15-20)
This one is specific that we are not supposed to harm God's prophets.
But mankind always has. They have never been welcomed with open
arms. They have been denied, persecuted and martyred for the sake of
bringing us guidance from God. And once again in this day the pattern
has been repeated not once but twice. And still most people don't
even know it.
And this quote is interesting considering that Muslims say that
Muhammad is the "Seal of the Prophets", and mean by that that
Revelation from God has ended for all time. It says in the Qur'an
that Revelation will never end:
27. And if all the trees on earth were pens and the Ocean (were ink),
with seven Oceans behind it to add to its (supply), yet would not the
Words of Allah be exhausted (in the writing): for Allah is Exalted in
power, Full of Wisdom. (The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 31)
Human beings tend to think that their own religion is true and
Revelation stopped after the Founder of their own Faith died (or
ascended). Most people don't realize that all religions are part of
the same great religion of God which has been revealed from age to
age. The origins of all are true, but it's the manmade elements of
religion which are false and can differ greatly one from the other.
Best wishes,
Suzanne
Douglas McAdam
On Dec 3, 2009, at 8:36 AM, Suzanne wrote:
> Human beings tend to think that their own religion is true and
> Revelation stopped after the Founder of their own Faith died (or
> ascended). Most people don't realize that all religions are part of
> the same great religion of God which has been revealed from age to
> age. The origins of all are true, but it's the manmade elements of
> religion which are false and can differ greatly one from the other.
Hi Suzanne-
I enjoyed reading your response and the one above prompted me to share
something that goes on in our classes as the Jail here.
Many times the Inmates will attend Bible classes given by a literal
minded Minister and then come to my class and ask religious questions
in which I share with them what I have been given by various scholars
regarding all Holy Books. I try to keep everything in the context of
Progressive Revelation in other words. Well not too long ago one of
the Inmates said, after reviewing some things that I shared from
scholars that he thought that far too many believers he has
encountered appear to judge anyone from outside their faith as being
sinners and not going to heaven, etc. I had shared the quotes from
all religions about how they all taught the "Only way" type of thing.
So he said maybe the people in India who do not really understand the
true teachings of Krishna may judge Americans as not going to heaven
because they do not accept Krishna and likewise Americans judge Indian
people as not going to heaven because they have not accept Jesus. I
thought this was a very astute observation from one who was raised a
Christian but who had not really continued investigating religion
because of crimes, addictions, etc.
I have had great success whenever someone asks me a specific question
about a specific topic, say like Baptism, the Only Way, The Return,
etc. because we have so many wonderful scholarly works to share about
each topic and when put into the context of all religions, in
progressive revelation for example, it has a great effect in prompting
them to independently study things.
regards,
doug
Carl Brehmer
> breaking up into sects?
"Were it not for the protecting power of the Covenant to guard
the impregnable fort of the Cause of God, there would arise among the
Baha'is, in one day, a thousand different sects as was the case in
former ages. But in this Blessed Dispensation, for the sake of the
permanency of the Cause of God and the avoidance of dissension amongst
the people of God, the Blessed Beauty (may my soul be a sacrifice unto
Him), has through the Supreme Pen written the Covenant and the
Testament..." ('Abdu'l-Baha, cited in "Baha'i World Faith", pp.
357-58)
There are at least two unity creating benefits that proceed from
Bahá’u’lláh having created the Universal House of Justice and
investing in it the authority that it has. The first, of course, is
the existence of an Institution around which the Baha'i Community can
rally. The second is the simultaneous, preemptive defrocking of any
and all alternative claims of authority that might distract the Baha'i
Community away from the Universal House of Justice.
As we have seen, the Lesser Covenant has not, is not and will not
prevent self-deluded individuals from offering their personal opinions
as the "right" or "correct" view, which every Baha'i should adapt if
only they were "truly enlightened." The presence of the Covenant
allows the Baha'is to simply dismiss such individuals out of hand and
prevents them from pulling the Faith in a thousand different
directions. The document "One Common Faith" explains it this way.
"Over the decades of its rise, several individuals, some of them
highly placed and all of them driven by the spur of ambition, did
their utmost to create separate followings loyal to themselves or to
the personal interpretations they had imposed on Bahá'u'lláh's
writings. At earlier stages in the evolution of religion, similar
attempts had proved successful in splitting the newborn faiths into
competing sects. In the case of the Bahá'í Cause, however, such
intrigues have failed, without exception, to produce more than
transient outbursts of controversy whose net effect has been to deepen
the community's understanding of its Founder's purpose and its
commitment to it.
" . . . The issue is not one of intellectual dissent, nor even of
moral weakness. Many people are resistant to accepting authority of
one kind or another, and eventually distance themselves from
circumstances that require it. Persons who have been attracted to the
Bahá'í Faith but who decide, for whatever reason, to leave it are
entirely free to do so.
"Covenant-breaking is a phenomenon fundamentally different in
nature. The impulse it arouses in those under its influence is not
simply to pursue freely whatever path they believe leads to personal
fulfilment or contribution to society. Rather, are such persons driven
by an apparently ungovernable determination to impose their personal
will on the community by any means available to them, without regard
for the damage done and without respect for the solemn undertakings
they entered into on being accepted as members of that community.
Ultimately, the self becomes the overriding authority, not only in the
individual's own life, but in whatever other lives can be successfully
influenced. As long and tragic experience has demonstrated all too
certainly, endowments such as distinguished lineage, intellect,
education, piety or social leadership can be harnessed, equally, to
the service of humanity or to that of personal ambition. In ages past,
when spiritual priorities of a different nature were the focus of the
Divine purpose, the consequences of such rebellion did not vitiate the
central message of any of the successive revelations of God. Today,
with the immense opportunities and horrific dangers that physical
unification of the planet has brought with it, commitment to the
requirements of unity becomes the touchstone of all professions of
devotion to the will of God or, for that matter, to the well-being of
humankind." One Common Faith pp. 61-63
Carl Brehmer
Suzanne
> I have had great success whenever someone asks me a specific question
> about a specific topic, say like Baptism, the Only Way, The Return,
> etc. because we have so many wonderful scholarly works to share about
> each topic and when put into the context of all religions, in
> progressive revelation for example, it has a great effect in prompting
> them to independently study things.
Hi Doug,
It's increasingly apparent in this thread that both aspects of the
Covenant -- the Greater and the Lesser -- are about unity. The
Greater Covenant is about the unity of mankind. First by God sending
humanityl Messengers to teach them His path and telling them to be on
the lookout and to accept the next one. And now by Baha'u'llah
explaining how we have all been following the same God, and we are
one:
"The tabernacle of unity hath been raised; regard ye not one another
as strangers. Ye are the fruits of one tree, and the leaves of one
branch."
(Baha'u'llah: Gleanings, Page: 218)
And then the Lesser Covenant protects the unity of the Baha'is, which,
eventually will extend to the whole of the human race. But this last
point intrigues me. How will this happen. Carl pointed out the role
of the Universal House of Justice in preserving our unity. Is that
it, or is there more to the Lesser Covenant's safeguards than that?
Suzanne
Suzanne
> "Were it not for the protecting power of the Covenant to guard
> the impregnable fort of the Cause of God, there would arise among the
> Baha'is, in one day, a thousand different sects as was the case in
> former ages. But in this Blessed Dispensation, for the sake of the
> permanency of the Cause of God and the avoidance of dissension amongst
> the people of God, the Blessed Beauty (may my soul be a sacrifice unto
> Him), has through the Supreme Pen written the Covenant and the
> Testament..." ('Abdu'l-Baha, cited in "Baha'i World Faith", pp.
> 357-58)
And then wrote:
>
> There are at least two unity creating benefits that proceed fr
om
> Bahá’u’lláh having created the Universal House of Justice and
> investing in it the authority that it has.
Both of your quotes were interesting and thought provoking. I agree
with what you said about the Universal House of Justices's ability to
create unity. But the quote written above by 'Abdu'l-Baha was written
long before their existence. How was the Covenant preventing the
creation of numerous sects in that day? I assume it was the same but
different.
Suzanne
Suzanne
> There are at least two unity creating benefits that proceed fr
om
> Bahá’u’lláh having created the Universal House of Justice and
> investing in it the authority that it has. The first, of course, is
> the existence of an Institution around which the Baha'i Community can
> rally. The second is the simultaneous, preemptive defrocking of any
> and all alternative claims of authority that might distract the Baha'i
> Community away from the Universal House of Justice.
I have been thinking some more about the above. Surely having a
central institution with authority isn't unique to the Baha'i Faith.
There is, of course, the Papacy. It was dominant in Christianity for
hundreds of years. They also had the authority to excommunicate
people. But it didn't stop schisms from happening. What is different
this time?
Suzanne
Douglas McAdam
look at what has happened to those individuals and groups who have
gone against the Covenant. None have lasted.
I'm not sure we can really say how it all works but it works. Seems
sort of like other laws that contain both reward and punishment. The
Covenant is love and that power can be used to attract or repel.
regards,
doug
drgoplayer
In Abdul-Baha's time I think the key element preserving unity was
a clear central figure and ONE authorized interpreter (same for the
Guardian). Previous religions did not have a clear center. Islam
might have but it was negated as Mohammad died. After 1957 the
Lessor Covenant is the protection as I will explain.
The biggest theological cause of schism is interpretation. (Power
masked as theology is the other big cause). In all previous
religions
there was no clear statement as to who could speak for God after
the Founder died. Therefore anyone could claim the right and did.
When two or more people in a religious community disagree
strongly over what some piece of the Revelation means then you
have the basis for a schism, but only if they each feel fully
confident that they are right.
I like to use Abdul-Baha's commentary on
_I was a hidden treasure_ as an example --
http://bahai-library.com/provisionals/hidden.treasure.html
as it is a really obscure point with ramifications for the structure
of
religious communities. (Its about the relationship between God and
Creation). It has also caused irreparable splits in every religion
for
1000s of years. Abdul-Baha says that both sides are right
but that people's minds are hard-wired to see this issue in different
ways. That is worth thinking about too.
Anyway the Lessor Covenant clearly tells all of us that we have no
basis for being sure we are absolutely right. End of schism! Now
we can argue about things all we want and get as excited as we
like but in the end we cannot dismiss anyone as absolutely wrong
and outside of the pale (not a true follower).
Cheers,
Tom
mike
> Hi everyone,
> In Abdul-Baha's time I think the key element preserving unity was
> a clear central figure and ONE authorized interpreter (same for the
> Guardian). Previous religions did not have a clear center. Islam
> might have but it was negated as Mohammad died. After 1957 the
> Lessor Covenant is the protection as I will explain.
>
> The biggest theological cause of schism is interpretation. (Power
It's mind blowing to me how people are able to consider schism, when
Baha'u'llahs own directive from the Aqdas is this:
"If, however, there is still disagreement, the same procedure should
be repeated once more, and the decision of the majority shall prevail.
He, verily, guideth whomsoever He pleaseth to the right way."
(Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 136)
This directive doesn't just apply to our administration it applies to
everyday Baha'is. Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha provided us with a
plethora of quotes stressing unity above _all_ else, even being right.
In my opinion, a covenant breaker must either be insane, malicious,
or incredibly dumb. There isn't much room for anything else.
Verily I say, whatever is sent down from the heaven of the Will of
God is the means for the establishment of order in the world and the
instrument for promoting unity and fellowship among its peoples.
(Baha'u'llah, Tablets of Baha'u'llah, p. 67)
It is in my opinion a travesty of american justice and demonstrates a
gross lack of understanding that in the US, individuals can openly
associate the name Baha'i with anything other than the Baha'i Faith.
Baha'u'llah created the Baha'i Faith, and there can be little doubt
that anyone else who would presume to use that name is violating his
will and for that matter infringing on the rights of Baha'is
everywhere.
Douglas McAdam
I agree and wanted to add a couple of thoughts.
It is obvious if we look at the evidence that the Covenant is working
to prevent schism for no Covenant Breakers have ever succeeded.
Regarding consultation I am under the impression from considering many
Writings regarding problem solving, speech, communication our purpose
and the like that consultation is more than just some admin. device
for arriving at decisions. It appears to me as the way we should
communicate with one another as living souls. The purpose of
consultation is unity and its object is truth but often many think
that truth is its purpose and instead of following the guidelines to
make sure all parties understand the problem, that they all have
ascertained facts, and principles, the offer prematurely a solution
which causes an attack and defend type of debate so common in our
society. I recall, but cannot find it quickly, a quote of the
Master's in which he explained about consultation and the need to
reach unity and he said "God forbid if unity is not possible then we
must go by majority" (paraphrase as best I could) So it is only when
we have exhausted our attempt to reach unity that we go ahead and vote
and abide by the majority.
The idea, as I understand it, is that by achieving unity and taking
unified action the truth will come more readily than if we simply go
by majority rule like the old world order method of action.
regards,
doug
Suzanne
>> In my opinion, a covenant breaker must either be insane, malicious,
> or incredibly dumb. There isn't much room for anything else.
Hi MIke,
The Central Figures of the Faith have called covenant breaking a
spiritual disease. It has to do with the ego; with pride, ambition
and a lust for leadership.
A case in point is a believer in the time of Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi
Effendi whose name was Avarih. He was a former mullah, and was very
learned and erudite, and quite full of himself. Most of the
believers in Iran held him in high esteem in the time of 'Abdu'l-Baha,
and Avarih was convinced of their loyalty to him personally. After
'Abdu;-Baha's passing, Avarih started insisting to Shoghi Effendi that
he should have the Universal House of Justice elected straight away.
When Shoghi Effendi didn't comply, he started agitating and finally
tried to create a rebellion of the Baha'is in Iran against the
Guardian. He soon found himself completely isolated. Every Baha'i
turned to the Guardian, the Centre of the Faith, and even Avarih's
wife left him.
Mike wrote:
> It is in my opinion a travesty of american justice and demonstrates a
> gross lack of understanding that in the US, individuals can openly
> associate the name Baha'i with anything other than the Baha'i Faith.
> Baha'u'llah created the Baha'i Faith, and there can be little doubt
> that anyone else who would presume to use that name is violating his
> will and for that matter infringing on the rights of Baha'is
> everywhere.
Who else in the U.S. besides Baha'is is using the name?
Best wishes,
Suzanne
compx2
feel like I am repeating myself, but I realize none of you have read
any of the previous postings.
You: "There has been some discussion about the Covenant on this forum,
and I thought it was such an important subject, it deserves its own
thread."
Much of what you refer to must be some of the things I have written
about the Covenant on these pages, mainly dealing with what I believe
must be our part in any covenant or contract, as I believe it is
clearly stated in the Writings.
You: "A covenant is a pact or agreement between two parties. The
eternal Covenant is, according to my understanding, the Covenant that
God made with humanity that whenever humanity loses its way,
spiritually speaking, God will send us His Messengers -- the Founders
of the world's great religions -- to give us fresh guidance from Him.
In return, when a new Messenger comes, then we are to accept them
wholeheartedly and strive to put their teachings into practice in our
lives."
Our part is "we are to accept"? That's it? Your opinion is
acceptance is all we have to do? Or is the "wholeheartedly" or the
"striving" also important parts? I mean, if we strive, and keep our
hearts closed to anything that doesn't come from the Messenger we
accept, have we done our part? And if we do strive wholeheartedly,
what do we get? "fresh guidance" every thousand years?
If I had to put the eternal Covenant of God in my own words it would
say rather that we must follow with our lives the teachings of God to
the best of our abilities, and in return He will show us that we are
rightly guided.
You: "What are some of the features of the Covenant of Baha'u'llah,
and how will it preserve the unity of the Faith, and ultimately, help
to bring about the unification of the whole human race?"
Now that is the interesting question about all this. I want to know
how it works. In my version of the Baha'i Faith it is simple. Anyone
who lives these sacred teachings knows, regardless of their religion,
when she/he hears God's Word. No one needs to tell them, or threaten
or enlighten them. They know. If a person who follows her/his
Covenant with the One True God there is no danger whatsoever of
splintering or misunderstanding or being wrong. If their aim is to
work alongside others who have similar aims to the goals God has set
for humanity the human race will become more and more unified by every
effort of these people who are rightly guided.
If, however, these people splinter the Faith of God by
misunderstanding, by arrogance, nonsensical and silly interpretations
of wise word and associating such interpretations with God, or
emphasis on His Name and not His Teachings, then the world will not
become more unified by these misguided efforts. Only the deeds that
bring about unity will bring about unity. Our Covenant is to work
with those who are rightly guided, regardless their religions.
You have, as usual, supplied us with an excellent quote:
"...the power of the Covenant will protect the Cause of Baha'u'llah
from the doubts of the people of error ...otherwise differences like
unto a most great tempest will encompass the Baha'i world."
If we can focus on what, precisely, is our part in the Cause of God,
and perform that part, we are doing our part in the Covenant. Then
and only then will our doubts be dispelled. It is up to each of us to
do what Baha'u'llah and God wants us to do. Then we will have no
doubts, then our difference will not become a tempest.
"... It is evident that the axis of the oneness of the world of
humanity is the power of the Covenant and nothing else."
Nothing else but us doing our part will bring apart the oneness of the
world of humanity. Regardless of our religions, unity is working
towards God's Will, is the axis. The Covenant is working toward
unity.
"...Therefore, in the beginning the believers must make their steps
firm in the Covenant so that the confirmations of Baha'u'llah may
encircle them from all sides, the
cohorts of the Supreme Concourse may become their supporters and
helpers, and the exhortations and advices of Abdu'l-Baha, like unto
the pictures engraved on stone, may remain permanent and ineffaceable
in the tablets of all hearts."
Without performing the deeds commanded us by God we have no part in
the Covenant. Firmly, in the begining, make steps to support and help
and follow the exhortations and advices we all know are true and from
God, and make them a permanent part of our beings, our hearts and
souls. That is our part in the Covenant.
You couldn't have picked a better quote. Thanks. --Kent
mike
>Who else in the U.S. besides Baha'is is using the name?
I have no desire to give these people any more air. But when
individuals use words like 'reform' or 'orthodox' attached to the name
Baha'i and campaign on the web, newspaper etc. These individuals in
fact are infringing on the rights of Baha'is everywhere. And our legal
system has apparently permitted this? I would liken this infringement
as equal to someone setting up an orthodox mcdonalds and selling
orthodox big macs. It infringes on the will and testament of
Baha'u'llah and is a direct violation of the Aqdas.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that Baha'u'llah left clear
provisions as you have stated that when in doubt you must abide by the
majority rule as opposed to schism.
Arguments have historically been presented by covenant breakers about
who is or who isn't the rightful heir to our faith etc. What is or
isn't the right interpretation. But suppose for a second that you were
to buy into any one of these arguments, you must still contend with
the fact that the Adqas, the most holy book of our faith penned by
Baha'u'llah himself makes clear in no uncertain terms that Baha'is
must respect the majority opinion.
Right now the inescapable fact is that the overwhelming majority of
Baha'is recognize the Universal House of Justice as our administrative
body. No fair minded impartial judge could read the Aqdas, which is
our most holy book of laws and come away with any other interpretation
than schism of any type is not a legitimate act for any Baha'i. And to
do so is at the very least an open renunciation of Baha'u'llah.
With this understanding it amazes me that groups attempt to modify
the name Baha'i with some qualifier and still attempt to lay claim to
a belief in Baha'u'llah. Irregardless of the chain of succession, they
cannot deny what was laid out in the Aqdas.
More disturbing is the protestant attitude that is ironically taken
in the name of religious freedom towards these groups. While schism is
acceptable to christianity, it is the very anti-thesis of the Baha'i
Faith. And for any civilized society to allow a handful of individuals
to oppress the Baha'is in this manner is to me unacceptable. As far as
I'm concerned by allowing these malicious people to desecrate the
Baha'i name the American judicial system has miserably failed to
protect the basic religious rights of Baha'is.
Baha'i
> How does the Lesser Covenant create unity and prevent the Faith from
> breaking up into sects?
The Lesser Covenant is the Covenant Baha'u'llah made with His
followers to guide them until the next Manifestation of God. There
are two parts to it -- the promise He takes from us, to follow the
appointed Center; and the promise He makes to us, to guide that
appointed Center.
He commanded everyone to turn to the Most Mighty Branch, which was, at
that time, the title by which Abdu'l-Baha was known. He implicitly
promised to guide Abdu'l-Baha, as Abdu'l-Baha explained
http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/c/BWF/bwf-45.html.utf8?queryinfallible&a
ctionhighlight#pg358
Then, Abdu'l-Baha made a Covenant, in His own Will and Testament. He
commanded everyone to turn to the Guardian and the Universal House of
Justice; and He promised that the Bab and Baha'u'llah would guide them
both.
http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/WT/wt-1.html.utf8?querysacred|youthfu
l&actionhighlight#gr18
This is what Shoghi Effendi terms the Master's Covenant
"Dear Bahá'í Friends:
"Your message, sent from your school session to our beloved Guardian,
reached him, and he has instructed me to answer it on his behalf, and
to assure you he was delighted to see that such a school for
pioneering had been held.
"He was also very glad to see that the believers are studying the
Covenant of the Master. For in the Master's Will and Testament are
enshrined the principles underlying the World Order, and unless the
believers fully grasp the greatness, functions, and purpose of the
institutions outlined in that Testament (and elaborated by the
Guardian in his book "The Dispensation of Bahá'u'lláh") they will not
be able to properly function as Bahá'ís individually or collectively.
The German friends need to acquire a profound understanding of the
Bahá'í Administrative Order to enable them to function as a Community,
according to Bahá'í laws, and to protect them from tests and the
attacks of the enemies of the Faith.
Dear co-workers:
I was so pleased and encouraged to receive your message and to learn
of the activity you have initiated. I will pray for its success and
extension from the depths of my heart. Persevere in your labours, and
rest assured that you will be guided, sustained and fully rewarded for
your meritorious and timely accomplishments,
Your true brother,
Shoghi
(The Light of Divine Guidance, Vol. I, p. 156)
So the lesser Covenant -- what Shoghi Effendi terms "the twin
Covenants of Baha'u'llah and of Abdu'l-Baha"
http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/se/CF/cf-6.html.utf8?querytwin|covenants
&actionhighlight#pg76
protects the unity of the Faith on the one hand by directing the
Baha'is to turn to the appointed Center; and by forbidding the Baha'is
from contacting or associating with those who turn away from that
Center; and on the other hand, by guiding the appointed Center.
Abdu'l-Baha proved by His words and deeds and spirit, that He was
divinely guided; so did Shoghi Effendi, and so is the Universal House
of Justice. On the other hand, what do the false pretenders
accomplish? As Abdu'l-Baha said in The Promulgation of Universal
Peace:
"The friends in Los Angeles and San Francisco are very firm in the
Covenant. If they sense the least violation on the part of anyone,
they shun him entirely; for they know that such a person is engaged in
extinguishing the lamps of faith ignited by the light of the Covenant,
thereby producing weakness and indifference in the divine Cause. For
instance, the firm ones teach a person. Then the violators go to him
and instill suspicion until he becomes lukewarm. There have been
violators here in Chicago for twenty years. What have they done?
Nothing. Have they been able to teach anybody? Have they been able to
speak in churches or address audiences elsewhere? Have they been able
to make anybody firm in the Cause? They are doing nothing except
extinguishing the lamps we ignite. The friends in San Francisco are
exceedingly firm. They do not receive violators in their homes.
Recently a violator went to that city. The Bahá’í friends turned him
away, saying, “You are not with us; why do you try to come among us?”
Today the most important principle of faith is firmness in the
Covenant, because firmness in the Covenant wards off differences.
Therefore, you must be firm as mountains."
http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/PUP/pup-114.html.utf8?querywhat%20hav
e%20they&actionhighlight#gr2
Yahya, Mirza Muhammad-Ali, Remey and those who followed him-- all did
nothing. They spent their time trying to get people to turn to them;
but other than that, they did nothing. No moral education, no
establishment of divine institutions, no leadership or guidance to the
needs of humanity. Only their faded claims.
It has been said that Covenant-breakers accomplished nothing; actually
they did "accomplish" something -- great harm. Abdu'l-Baha commented
on the followers of Yahya, and said that a remnant of followers of him
would survive; this was the violation of the Covenant of the Bab.
But the Lesser Covenant of Baha'u'llah was so clear, so unmistakable
in its designation of Abdu'l-Baha, that He said that in the future
there would not be a single follower of Mirza Muhammad-Ali. And that
is the case today. His only followers are a few surviving family
members, and they do not "follow" him in the sense of rever him and
turn to his writings; their following is expressed only negatively, in
that they turned away from the appointed Center. And this turning away
should make us stronger, in how we turn towards the Center.
"Briefly, this is the wisdom of referring the laws of society to the
House of Justice. In the religion of Islam, similarly, not every
ordinance was explicitly revealed; nay not a tenth part of a tenth
part was included in the Text; although all matters of major
importance were specifically referred to, there were undoubtedly
thousands of laws which were unspecified. These were devised by the
divines of a later age according to the laws of Islamic jurisprudence,
and individual divines made conflicting deductions from the original
revealed ordinances. All these were enforced. Today this process of
deduction is the right of the body of the House of Justice, and the
deductions and conclusions of individual learned men have no
authority, unless they are endorsed by the House of Justice. The
difference is precisely this, that from the conclusions and
endorsements of the body of the House of Justice whose members are
elected by and known to the world-wide Bahá'í community, no
differences will arise; whereas the conclusions of individual divines
and scholars would definitely lead to differences, and result in
schism, division, and dispersion. The oneness of the Word would be
destroyed, the unity of the Faith would disappear, and the edifice of
the Faith of God would be shaken."
(Abdu'l-Baha, Tablet quoted in Messages from the Universal House of
Justice 1963-1986, p. 85, paragraph 35.7d)
So, in sum, in response to your question, all three of these are
needed to preserve the unity of the Faith:
Turning to, and seeking guidance from, the Successor
Shunning Covenant-breakers
The fruits from the guidance flowing through the divinely-guided
Successor
Brent
Suzanne
> You: "A covenant is a pact or agreement between two parties. The
> eternal Covenant is, according to my understanding, the Covenant that
> God made with humanity that whenever humanity loses its way,
> spiritually speaking, God will send us His Messengers -- the Founders
> of the world's great religions -- to give us fresh guidance from Him.
> In return, when a new Messenger comes, then we are to accept them
> wholeheartedly and strive to put their teachings into practice in our
> lives."
Kent wrote:
> Our part is "we are to accept"? That's it? Your opinion is
> acceptance is all we have to do? Or is the "wholeheartedly" or the
> "striving" also important parts?
Kent,
Of course the wholehearted striving is important. They are the twin
duties: recognition and obedience to whatever has been revealed.
Both are equally important, and neither is acceptable without the
other, as Baha'u'llah has stated:
"The first duty prescribed by God for His servants is the recognition
of Him Who is the Dayspring of His Revelation and the Fountain of His
laws, Who representeth the Godhead in both the Kingdom of His Cause
and the world of creation. Whoso achieveth this duty hath attained
unto all good; and whoso is deprived thereof hath gone astray, though
he be the author of every righteous deed. It behoveth everyone who
reacheth this most sublime station, this summit of transcendent glory,
to observe every ordinance of Him Who is the Desire of the world.
These twin duties are inseparable. Neither is acceptable without the
other. Thus hath it been decreed by Him Who is the Source of Divine
inspiration."
(Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Aqdas, Page: 19)
Kent wrote:
I mean, if we strive, and keep our
> hearts closed to anything that doesn't come from the Messenger we
> accept, have we done our part?
Nothing has been said about shutting out everything that doesn't come
from the Messenger. Baha'is are supposed to live in the world and be
part of it, while, at the same time striving to translate whatever has
been revealed into action. In this way, little by little, day by day,
we will transform our own lives and be able to have a positive effect
on the world around us.
Kent wrote:
> And if we do strive wholeheartedly,
> what do we get? "fresh guidance" every thousand years?
If we do strive to live the life Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l-Baha taught
us, then we will develop spiritual qualities -- virtues -- which we
are told are needed for speedy progress in the next world. Also, we
will do our part in bringing about an "ever-advancing civilization".
The fresh guidance will come to God whenever humanity needs it whether
we play our part or not. That's His part in the Covenant, and He
gives it freely.
Kent:
> If I had to put the eternal Covenant of God in my own words it would
> say rather that we must follow with our lives the teachings of God to
> the best of our abilities, and in return He will show us that we are
> rightly guided.
Can you cite a quote that says this in different words?
Suzanne:"What are some of the features of the Covenant of Baha'u'llah,
> and how will it preserve the unity of the Faith, and ultimately, help
> to bring about the unification of the whole human race?"
Kent:
> Now that is the interesting question about all this. I want to know
> how it works. In my version of the Baha'i Faith it is simple. Anyon
e
> who lives these sacred teachings knows, regardless of their religion,
> when she/he hears God's Word. No one needs to tell them, or threaten
> or enlighten them. They know. If a person who follows her/his
> Covenant with the One True God there is no danger whatsoever of
> splintering or misunderstanding or being wrong. If their aim is to
> work alongside others who have similar aims to the goals God has set
> for humanity the human race will become more and more unified by every
> effort of these people who are rightly guided.
Suzanne:
I think you are blurring two things together. You are speaking of the
Baha'i teaching of the oneness of humanity and the oneness of religion
which is very valid and true. All people are created and loved by
God who does guide everybody. Baha'is are supposed to live in the
world and work side-by-side to create a better world along with
everyone. We are supposed to "consort with the followers of all
religions with joy and fellowship." We aren't supposed to judge any
soul, let alone threaten anyone. This is all very true, and this
should be the stance of a Baha'i. We should love, be kind and
respectful of all people, and, in fact, all living creatures. These
are part of the Baha'i teachings, but they aren't the Covenant which
God has made with humanity that when He sends His Messengers we need
to turn towards them and accept them. This is between God and human
souls. Is it my opinion that every soul is prepared in this day to
recognize Baha'u'llah and become a Baha'i? No. Only a certain
percentage are. Is it my opinion that all other religions should
cease from this day on? Definitely not. Our response to others should
be as you say. But I cannot change the fact that Baha'u'llah has said
what He has about what the Eternal Covenant means.
Kent:
> If we can focus on what, precisely, is our part in the Cause of God,
> and perform that part, we are doing our part in the Covenant. Then
> and only then will our doubts be dispelled. It is up to each of us to
> do what Baha'u'llah and God wants us to do. Then we will have no
> doubts, then our difference will not become a tempest.
I agree, Kent. And one of the things that God has commanded us is not
to dwell on the faults of others, or to consider ourselves in the
least superior to other people. We are supposed to be humble, kind,
and loving to all, and to look on all with "sin-covering eyes" --
whether they call themselves Baha'is or any other name. this will
promote the peace and unity of the world. "Let deeds not words be
your adorning."
Kent:
> Nothing else but us doing our part will bring apart the oneness of the
> world of humanity. Regardless of our religions, unity is working
> towards God's Will, is the axis. The Covenant is working toward
> unity.
True.
Best wishes,
Suzanne
Suzanne
> >Who else in the U.S. besides Baha'is is using the name?
>
> I have no desire to give these people any more air. But when
> individuals use words like 'reform' or 'orthodox' attached to the name
> Baha'i and campaign on the web, newspaper etc. These individuals in
> fact are infringing on the rights of Baha'is everywhere.
Oh. Sorry, I didn't realize what you were talking about.
> I guess the point I'm trying to make is that Baha'u'llah left clear
> provisions as you have stated that when in doubt you must abide by the
> majority rule as opposed to schism.
I don't think that the provision is about abiding by majority rule but
in obedience to the Covenant. As you know Baha'u'llah told all the
Baha'is to turn to 'Abdu'l-Baha after His passing and said that
whatever He said or did was of God. In His Will and Testament,
'Abdu'l-Baha named Shoghi Effendi, as the Guardian, and the Universal
House of Justice, to be Centres of the Covenant, and He said that
whatever they did or said was of God, and we should follow it.
Reference was made to future Guardians but they had to heirs of Shoghi
Effendi, and he had no heirs. Also, he was supposed to name them in a
will, which he did not. Therefore, there are no guardians left, but
there is the infallible Unviersal House of Justice, and we turn to
them.
Best wishes,
Suzanne
Brent Poirier
> I think the Greater Covenant is more easily understood than the Lesser
> Covenant. Why do you think that God didn't choose to make a specific
> Covenant about successorship until this Dispensation? Wouldn't it
> have solved a lot of problems for their to have been a clear Covenant
> around successorship in the time of Christ or Muhammad?
I think the Lesser Covenant is just as easy to understand as the
Greater Covenant is. The Greater Covenant is that God promises that a
succession of Manifestations of God will come, and that God will guide
Them; and takes from humanity a promise to accept them. Within that
Covenant, each Manifestation makes a Covenant with His followers, that
a Manifestation will succeed him in about 500 or 1000 years, and takes
a promise from His followers who live after that time, to accept that
successor Manifestation.
The concept is the same for the Lesser Covenant. During the
Dispensation, prior to the appearance of the next Manifestation, there
is someone to turn to, whom the Manifestation promises to guide; and
He takes from His followers a promise to turn to him, and seek his
guidance. In this Dispensation there are a number of unique features:
1. In addition to turning to a guided individual, in this Dispensation
we have God's promise that the Manifestations will guide an elected
body; and taking from humanity a promise to turn to it, and seek its
guidance:
"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). Whatsoever they decide is
of God. Whoso obeyeth him not, neither obeyeth them, hath not obeyed
God; whoso rebelleth against him and against them hath rebelled
against God; whoso opposeth him hath opposed God; whoso contendeth
with them hath contended with God; whoso disputeth with him hath
disputed with God; whoso denieth him hath denied God; whoso
disbelieveth in him hath disbelieved in God; whoso deviateth,
separateth himself and turneth aside from him hath in truth deviated,
separated himself and turned aside from God. May the wrath, the fierce
indignation, the vengeance of God rest upon him!"
(The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 11)
"All must seek guidance and turn unto the Center of the Cause and the
House of Justice. And he that turneth unto whatsoever else is indeed
in grievous error."
(The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 25)
To my knowledge, a Manifestation has never before promised divine
guidance to a consultative body.
There are other aspects of this Dispensation that are unprecedented.
2. One is, that in this Dispensation, the learned, not only the
unlettered, have recognized the Manifestation:
"Amongst the proofs demonstrating the truth of this Revelation is
this, that in every age and Dispensation, whenever the invisible
Essence was revealed in the person of His Manifestation, certain
souls, obscure and detached from all worldly entanglements, would seek
illumination from the Sun of Prophethood and Moon of divine guidance,
and would attain unto the divine Presence. For this reason, the
divines of the age and those possessed of wealth, would scorn and
scoff at these people....
In this most resplendent Dispensation, however, this most mighty
Sovereignty, a number of illumined divines, of men of consummate
learning, of doctors of mature wisdom, have attained unto His Court,
drunk the cup of His divine Presence, and been invested with the
honour of His most excellent favour. They have renounced, for the sake
of the Beloved, the world and all that is therein."
(Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Iqan / The Book of Certitude, pp. 221-222;
paragraphs 246-247)
3. In the following lengthy passage, Abdu'l-Baha lists a number of
teachings that are unique to this Dispensation, concluding with the
written Lesser Covenant, the written Covenant of Succession:
"I will speak to you concerning the special teachings of Bahá'u'lláh.
All the divine principles announced by the tongue of the Prophets of
the past are to be found in the words of Bahá'u'lláh; but in addition
to these He has revealed certain new teachings which are not found in
any of the sacred Books of former times. I shall mention some of them;
the others, which are many in number, may be found in the Books,
Tablets and Epistles written by Bahá'u'lláh -- such as the Hidden
Words, the Glad Tidings, the Words of Paradise, Tajalliyat, Tarazat
and others. Likewise, in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas there are new teachings
which cannot be found in any of the past Books or Epistles of the
Prophets.
"A fundamental teaching of Bahá'u'lláh is the oneness of the world of
humanity. Addressing mankind, He says, "Ye are all leaves of one tree
and the fruits of one branch." By this it is meant that the world of
humanity is like a tree, the nations or peoples are the different
limbs or branches of that tree, and the individual human creatures are
as the fruits and blossoms thereof. In this way Bahá'u'lláh expressed
the oneness of humankind, whereas in all religious teachings of the
past the human world has been represented as divided into two parts:
one known as the people of the Book of God, or the pure tree, and the
other the people of infidelity and error, or the evil tree. The former
were considered as belonging to the faithful, and the others to the
hosts of the irreligious and infidel -- one part of humanity the
recipients of divine mercy, and the other the object of the wrath of
their Creator. Bahá'u'lláh removed this by proclaiming the oneness of
the world of humanity, and this principle is specialized in His
teachings, for He has submerged all mankind in the sea of divine
generosity. Some are asleep; they need to be awakened. Some are
ailing; they need to be healed. Some are immature as children; they
need to be trained. But all are recipients of the bounty and bestowals
of God.
"Another new principle revealed by Bahá'u'lláh is the injunction to
investigate truth -- that is to say, no man should blindly follow his
ancestors and forefathers. Nay, each must see with his own eyes, hear
with his own ears and investigate the truth himself in order that he
may follow the truth instead of blind acquiescence and imitation of
ancestral beliefs.
"Bahá'u'lláh has announced that the foundation of all the religions of
God is one, that oneness is truth and truth is oneness which does not
admit of plurality. This teaching is new and specialized to this
Manifestation.
"He sets forth a new principle for this day in the announcement that
religion must be the cause of unity, harmony and agreement among
mankind. If it is the cause of discord and hostility, if it leads to
separation and creates conflict, the absence of religion would be
preferable in the world.
"Furthermore, He proclaims that religion must be in harmony with
science and reason. If it does not conform to science and reconcile
with reason, it is superstition. Down to the present day it has been
customary for man to accept a religious teaching, even though it was
not in accord with human reason and judgment. The harmony of religious
belief with reason is a new vista which Bahá'u'lláh has opened for the
soul of man.
"He establishes the equality of man and woman. This is peculiar to the
teachings of Bahá'u'lláh, for all other religions have placed man
above woman.
"A new religious principle is that prejudice and fanaticism -- whether
sectarian, denominational, patriotic or political -- are destructive
to the foundation of human solidarity; therefore, man should release
himself from such bonds in order that the oneness of the world of
humanity may become manifest.
"Universal peace is assured by Bahá'u'lláh as a fundamental
accomplishment of the religion of God -- that peace shall prevail
among nations, governments and peoples, among religions, races and all
conditions of mankind. This is one of the special characteristics of
the Word of God revealed in this Manifestation.
"Bahá'u'lláh declares that all mankind should attain knowledge and
acquire an education. This is a necessary principle of religious
belief and observance, characteristically new in this dispensation.
"He has set forth the solution and provided the remedy for the
economic question. No religious Books of the past Prophets speak of
this important human problem.
"He has ordained and established the House of Justice, which is
endowed with a political as well as a religious function, the
consummate union and blending of church and state. This institution is
under the protecting power of Bahá'u'lláh Himself. A universal, or
international, House of Justice shall also be organized. Its rulings
shall be in accordance with the commands and teachings of Bahá'u'lláh,
and that which the Universal House of Justice ordains shall be obeyed
by all mankind. This international House of Justice shall be appointed
and organized from the Houses of Justice of the whole world, and all
the world shall come under its administration.
"As to the most great characteristic of the revelation of Bahá'u'lláh,
a specific teaching not given by any of the Prophets of the past: It
is the ordination and appointment of the Center of the Covenant. By
this appointment and provision He has safeguarded and protected the
religion of God against differences and schisms, making it impossible
for anyone to create a new sect or faction of belief. To ensure unity
and agreement He has entered into a Covenant with all the people of
the world, including the interpreter and explainer of His teachings,
so that no one may interpret or explain the religion of God according
to his own view or opinion and thus create a sect founded upon his
individual understanding of the divine Words. The Book of the Covenant
or Testament of Bahá'u'lláh is the means of preventing such a
possibility, for whosoever shall speak from the authority of himself
alone shall be degraded. Be ye informed and cognizant of this. Beware
lest anyone shall secretly question or deny this to you. There are
some people of self-will and desire who do not communicate their
intentions to you in clear language. They envelop their meanings in
secret statements and insinuations. For instance, they praise a
certain individual, saying he is wise and learned, that he was
glorified in the presence of Bahá'u'lláh, conveying this to you in an
insidious way or by innuendoes. Be ye aware of this! Be awakened and
enlightened! For Christ has said that no one hides the lamp under a
bushel. The purport of my admonition is that certain people will
endeavor to influence you in the direction of their own personal views
and opinions. Therefore, be upon your guard in order that none may
assail the oneness and integrity of Bahá'u'lláh's Cause. Praise be to
God! Bahá'u'lláh left nothing unsaid. He explained everything. He left
no room for anything further to be said. Yet there are some who for
the sake of personal interest and prestige will attempt to sow the
seeds of sedition and disloyalty among you. To protect and safeguard
the religion of God from this and all other attack, the Center of the
Covenant has been named and appointed by Bahá'u'lláh. Therefore, if
anyone should set forth a statement in praise or recognition of
another than this appointed Center, you must ask him to produce a
written proof of the authority he follows. Let him show you a trace
from the pen of the Center of the Covenant Himself, substantiating his
praise and support of any other than the rightful one. Inform him that
you are not permitted to accept the words of everyone. Say to him, "It
is possible to love and praise a person today, to accept and follow
another tomorrow and still another next day. Therefore, we cannot
afford to listen to this or that individual. Where are your proofs and
writings? Where is your authority from the pen of the Center of the
Covenant?"
"My purpose is to explain to you that it is your duty to guard the
religion of God so that none shall be able to assail it outwardly or
inwardly. If you find harmful teachings are being set forth by some
individual, no matter who that individual be, even though he should be
my own son, know, verily, that I am completely severed from him. If
anyone speaks against the Covenant, even though he should be my son,
know that I am opposed to him."
(Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 453-458)
4. Abdu'l-Baha describes the Covenant of Baha'u'llah as “a Covenant
so firm and mighty that from the beginning of time until the present
day no religious Dispensation hath produced its like.” (Quoted in The
World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 136) and Shoghi Effendi describes th
e
Covenant of Bahá'u'lláh as “a Covenant unique in the spiritual annals
of mankind.” (Citadel of Faith, p. 4).
I do not know of a place in the Baha'i Writings where there is an
authoritative statement indicating why no previous Manifestation
issued a written Covenant designating to whom to turn after His own
passing. Shoghi Effendi has written of the provisions of the Most
Holy Book in this regard, in which Baha'u'llah ordained His immediate
Successor Abdu'l-Baha, and in addition ordained as His Twin Successors
the institutions of the Guardianship and the Universal House of
Justice to maintain the integrity and unity of His Faith:
"Unique and stupendous as was this Proclamation, it proved to be but a
prelude to a still mightier revelation of the creative power of its
Author, and to what may well rank as the most signal act of His
ministry -- the promulgation of the Kitáb-i-Aqdas. Alluded to in the
Kitáb-i-Íqán; the principal repository of that Law which the Prophet
Isaiah had anticipated, and which the writer of the Apocalypse had
described as the "new heaven" and the "new earth," as "the Tabernacle
of God," as the "Holy City," as the "Bride," the "New Jerusalem coming
down from God," this "Most Holy Book," whose provisions must remain
inviolate for no less than a thousand years, and whose system will
embrace the entire planet, may well be regarded as the brightest
emanation of the mind of Bahá'u'lláh, as the Mother Book of His
Dispensation, and the Charter of His New World Order.
"Revealed soon after Bahá'u'lláh had been transferred to the house of
Udi Khammar (circa 1873), at a time when He was still encompassed by
the tribulations that had afflicted Him, through the acts committed by
His enemies and the professed adherents of His Faith, this Book, this
treasury enshrining the priceless gems of His Revelation, stands out,
by virtue of the principles it inculcates, the administrative
institutions it ordains and the function with which it invests the
appointed Successor of its Author, unique and incomparable among the
world's sacred Scriptures. For, unlike the Old Testament and the Holy
Books which preceded it, in which the actual precepts uttered by the
Prophet Himself are non-existent; unlike the Gospels, in which the few
sayings attributed to Jesus Christ afford no clear guidance regarding
the future administration of the affairs of His Faith; unlike even the
Qur'án which, though explicit in the laws and ordinances formulated by
the Apostle of God, is silent on the all-important subject of the
succession, the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, revealed from first to last by the
Author of the Dispensation Himself, not only preserves for posterity
the basic laws and ordinances on which the fabric of His future World
Order must rest, but ordains, in addition to the function of
interpretation which it confers upon His Successor, the necessary
institutions through which the integrity and unity of His Faith can
alone be safeguarded."
(Shoghi Effendi, God Passes By, pp. 213-214)
Since the Writings do not answer why no previous Manifestation did so,
this leads to questions. Was it because the previous Manifestations
of God did not know the art of writing? Was it because in the
previous Dispensations, the generality of humanity could not read?
Was this to set aside as unique, this Revelation? Was it because no
previous Revelation had as its central purpose the establishment of
the unity of the peoples of the earth, not only in spirit, but in a
divinely-conceived Order?
Brent
Brent Poirier
> If I had to put the eternal Covenant of God in my own words it would
> say rather that we must follow with our lives the teachings of God to
> the best of our abilities, and in return He will show us that we are
> rightly guided.
This is what the Hand of the Cause George Townshend referred to as the
"Ethical Covenant" as distinct from the Covenant of Successorship.
The Covenant of Successorship means to turn to the source of guidance
appointed by the Manifestation, after He leaves this earth. To
violate this Covenant is to be expelled from the Cause of God as a
Covenant-breaker.
On the other hand, the Ethical Covenant means to live by the teachings
of the Manifestation. For example, in the Most Holy Book Baha'u'llah
writes:
"Recite ye the verses of God every morn and eventide. Whoso faileth to
recite them hath not been faithful to the Covenant of God and His
Testament..."
(Baha'u'llah, The Most Holy Book, p. 73, paragraph 149)
This does not, in Baha'i parlance, mean that a person who does not
recite the sacred Text every morning and evening is a Covenant-
breaker. The term "Covenant-breaker" has a specific application. It
means only, a person who violates the Covenant of Succession; a person
who turns away from Abdu'l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi, or the Universal
House of Justice.
Baha'u'llah calls on His followers to abide by both the Ethical
Covenant, to which you refer; and the Covenant of Succession -- the
appointment of His Successors. In the very last words Abdu'l-Baha
writes to the human race, the very last words of His Will and
Testament, Abdu'l-Baha refers to the Covenant of Succession: To seek
guidance from, and turn to, the twin institutions of the Guardianship
and the Universal House of Justice:
"All must seek guidance and turn unto the Center of the Cause and the
House of Justice. And he that turneth unto whatsoever else is indeed
in grievous error. The Glory of Glories rest upon you!" (Abdu'l-Baha,
The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 25)
Of course, the Ethical Covenant -- to live by the guidance of the
Manifestation, and the Covenant of Successorship -- to turn to His
Successors, are all part of one Covenant. But I think it helps make
it clear, to distinguish between these aspects of the one Covenant;
because if a person violates each and every one of the laws and
principles of Baha'u'llah, he will not be expelled from the Cause of
God as a Covenant-breaker; but if a person abides by each and every
one of the laws and principles of Baha'u'llah, but turns away from one
of His Successors, all is for naught, and he is expelled from the
Cause of God as a Covenant-breaker.
Brent
Sizwe Cawe
:25).
From: mike <mike...@yahoo.com>
9 December, 2009 20:05:14
U.S. besides Baha'is is using the name?
tc. These individuals in
rywhere. And our legal
n this infringement
and selling
Baha'u'llah and is a direct violation of the Aqdas.
reakers about
t is or
were
the fact that the Adqas, the most holy book of our faith penned by
verwhelming majority of
as our administrative
Aqdas, which is
interpretation
ha'i. And to
ah.
the name Baha'i with some qualifier and still attempt to lay claim to
a belief in Baha'u'llah. Irregardless of the chain of succession, they
ably failed to
Douglas McAdam
Hi Brent-
I really appreciated the quotes and comments you posted.
Another thought was prompted as I read through those quotes.
Are there any quotes as to whom the Covenant is binding upon? Does
the Covenant have an effect on even those who are not Baha'is?
And is there any quotes regarding what happens to those who do not
accept Baha'u'llah and obey Him?
Seems like our part of the Covenant is to love all, even those who
reject Baha'u'llah.
regards,
doug
mike
>but in obedience to the Covenant. As you know Baha'u'llah told all
>the Baha'is to turn to 'Abdu'l-Baha after His passing and said that
>whatever He said or did was of God. In His Will and Testament,
>'Abdu'l-Baha named Shoghi Effendi, as the Guardian, and the
>Universal House of Justice, to be Centres of the Covenant, and He
>said that whatever they did or said was of God, and we should >follow it.
Don't misunderstand me here. The line of succession from Baha'u'llah
through the Guardian and to the Universal house of justice is
indisputable as far as I'm concerned.
What I am sincerely hoping to point out is that Baha'u'llah laid out
provisions for determining Baha'i policy (in the Aqdas) that would
apply to schism. So if a fair minded judge were to understand this, I
cannot imagine how that judge would ever consent to there being any
legal proposed variants of our faith. I simply cannot accept that our
legal system would be so incapable of seeing this point. I must assume
that this has not been properly explored.
My concern comes back to precedent. Better that issues like this are
resolved while the Faith is relatively small.
compx2
to thank Brent who seems to be the only one who has acknowledged the
fact that no covenant is not about successorship alone. There must be
two parts. And God has handled and is handling the successorship
issue quite well, I feel no need to put my dollar fifty in about
successorship.
My issue is the misunderstanding of the Covenant of God, not
successorship, not future guidance and the next manifestation of the
Eternal in our tangential reality, not how much of our hearts we must
give to our acceptance. Those are issues we each must deal with, or
not, since there is nothing at all we can settle about the future or
God's acceptance of others.
My interest is in, well, the Covenant. What is our part? What do we
get in return for our part?
You said: "Of course the wholehearted striving is important." Why is
that? I mean, aren't deeds what matter? If trying was all that
mattered we could all be saved if we just tried not to murder, pillage
and steal, even if we are unsuccessful in our plight to better
ourselves.
So I disagree. Wanting is not the same as doing, to God or to
anyone. If we want the rewards of the Covenant trying to follow the
rules is not enough.
You: "In this way, little by little, day by day, we will transform our
own lives and be able to have a positive effect on the world around
us."
That remains to be seen.
You: "If we do strive to live the life Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l-Baha
taught us, then we will develop spiritual qualities -- virtues --
which we are told are needed for speedy progress in the next world."
Remove the words "strive to" from that sentence and we have agreement.
You: "Also, we will do our part in bringing about an "ever-advancing
civilization".
That remains to be seen.
You: "Can you cite a quote that says this in different words?"
I was reading from the many quotes you cited. It seems to me Baha's
read into quotes strange unintended meanings of words. Here we have
the word "covenant" which very clearly means a contract between two
parties, but you and the rest of the Baha'is have weakened the word to
mean that all we have to do is try and God will do all the work. I
don't think any of the quotes say that. God works through us, and if
we don't do anything nothing gets done.
You: "I think you are blurring two things together."
So I look through the paragraph for those two things, and it is not
clear. You say "Our response to others should be as you say. But I
cannot change the fact that Baha'u'llah has said what He has about
what the Eternal Covenant means." Perhaps what you mean is that I am
blurring the idea that other religions are good, have good teachings
and do good things with the idea that those religions might be right
to do such things. Is that it? That we can refrain from judging
those religions even though we, as Baha'is, know they are wrong. Is
that it?
--Kent
compx2
to thank Brent who seems to be the only one who has acknowledged the
fact that no covenant is not about successorship alone. There must be
two parts. And God has handled and is handling the successorship
issue quite well, I feel no need to put my dollar fifty in about
successorship.
My issue is the misunderstanding of the Covenant of God, not
successorship, not future guidance and the next manifestation of the
Eternal in our tangential reality, not how much of our hearts we must
give to our acceptance. Those are issues we each must deal with, or
not, since there is nothing at all we can settle about the future or
God's acceptance of others.
My interest is in, well, the Covenant. What is our part? What do we
get in return for our part?
You said: "Of course the wholehearted striving is important." Why is
that? I mean, aren't deeds what matter? If trying was all that
mattered we could all be saved if we just tried not to murder, pillage
and steal, even if we are unsuccessful in our plight to better
ourselves.
So I disagree. Wanting is not the same as doing, to God or to
anyone. If we want the rewards of the Covenant trying to follow the
rules is not enough.
You: "In this way, little by little, day by day, we will transform our
own lives and be able to have a positive effect on the world around
us."
That remains to be seen.
You: "If we do strive to live the life Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l-Baha
taught us, then we will develop spiritual qualities -- virtues --
which we are told are needed for speedy progress in the next world."
Remove the words "strive to" from that sentence and we have agreement.
You: "Also, we will do our part in bringing about an "ever-advancing
civilization".
That remains to be seen.
You: "Can you cite a quote that says this in different words?"
I was reading from the many quotes you cited. It seems to me Baha's
read into quotes strange unintended meanings of words. Here we have
the word "covenant" which very clearly means a contract between two
parties, but you and the rest of the Baha'is have weakened the word to
mean that all we have to do is try and God will do all the work. I
don't think any of the quotes say that. God works through us, and if
we don't do anything nothing gets done.
You: "I think you are blurring two things together."
So I look through the paragraph for those two things, and it is not
clear. You say "Our response to others should be as you say. But I
cannot change the fact that Baha'u'llah has said what He has about
what the Eternal Covenant means." Perhaps what you mean is that I am
blurring the idea that other religions are good, have good teachings
and do good things with the idea that those religions might be right
to do such things. Is that it? That we can refrain from judging
those religions even though we, as Baha'is, know they are wrong. Is
that it?
--Kent
On Dec 10, 3:00 am, Suzanne <sb.gerst...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
compx2
I liked reading your post, and followed you very well right up until
this:
You: "This does not, in Baha'i parlance, mean that a person who does
not recite the sacred Text every morning and evening is a Covenant-
breaker."
According to Baha'i parlance, no, one who breaks the Covenant of God
is not a Covenant Breaker. Those of us who do not do our part in the
Covenant, who break the Covenant, are not what the Baha'i
administration would term Covenant Breakers. It seems to me those
handful of people know who they are and should not get nearly the
press we give them here. It such a silly thing.
I understand breaking the Covenant into successorship and ethics. But
clearly I am not talking about successorship.
You: "... if a person abides by each and every one of the laws and
principles of Baha'u'llah, but turns away from one of His Successors,
all is for naught, and he is expelled from the Cause of God as a
Covenant-breaker."
I would rather say if a person actively works to undermine any
religion all is for naught and that person might be accurately labeled
a Covenant Breaker in the worst of Baha'i traditions.
Thanks for reading. --Kent
Suzanne
> You said: "Of course the wholehearted striving is important." Why is
> that? I mean, aren't deeds what matter? If trying was all that
> mattered we could all be saved if we just tried not to murder, pillage
> and steal, even if we are unsuccessful in our plight to better
> ourselves.
>
> So I disagree. Wanting is not the same as doing,
Kent,
When I say striving I definitely do mean performing deeds. I mean
many, many deeds of acting in accordance with what has been said;
transforming the commands of God into action. But I also mean that
none of us are perfect. Only 'Abdu'l-Baha was perfect. So we all
fail sometimes, so we need to acknowledge that to ourselves, to bring
ourselves to account each day, and figure out what we didn't do as
well as we should have, and try again tomorrow. This will bring about
our transformation from people who mostly follow our own egos into
people who live more from our higher nature. It has to do with
submitting our wills to God's will. And in this, both parts of the
Covenant -- the Covenant of succession and the ethical Covenant are
important. First we need to know where to look for God's will for us,
and then we need to do our utmost to turn that into reality in our
lives.
By the way, the word "strive" in this connection is in countless
places in the Writings:
.. " It is incumbent upon every man of insight and understanding to
strive to translate that which hath been written into reality and
action.... "
(Baha'u'llah: Gleanings, Page: 250)
"Strive that ye may be enabled to manifest to the peoples of the earth
the signs of God, and to mirror forth His commandments. Let your acts
be a guide unto all mankind, for the professions of most men, be they
high or low, differ from their conduct. It is through your deeds that
ye can distinguish yourselves from others. Through them the
brightness of your light can be shed upon the whole earth."
(Baha'u'llah: Gleanings, Page: 305)
"Therefore I say unto you that ye should strive to follow the counsels
of these Blessed Books, and so order your lives that ye may, following
the examples set before you, become yourselves the saints of the Most
High! "
(`Abdu'l-Baha: Paris Talks*, Page: 62)
"Strive with all the power of your souls, your deeds, actions and
words to assist the spread of these glad tidings and the descent of
this merciful bounty. You are the reality and expression of your
deeds and actions. If you abide by the precepts and teachings of the
Blessed Perfection, the heavenly world and ancient Kingdom will be
yours - eternal happiness, love and everlasting life. The divine
bounties are flowing. Each one of you has been given the opportunity
of becoming a tree yielding abundant fruits."
(`Abdu'l-Baha: Promulgation of Universal Peace*, Page: 9)
Kent wrote:
.. It seems to me Baha's
> read into quotes strange unintended meanings of words. Here we have
> the word "covenant" which very clearly means a contract between two
> parties, but you and the rest of the Baha'is have weakened the word to
> mean that all we have to do is try and God will do all the work.
No, Kent. That is not what I said or meant,, but it is what you
misinterpreted of what I said.
Perhaps what you mean is that I am
> blurring the idea that other religions are good, have good teachings
> and do good things with the idea that those religions might be right
> to do such things. Is that it? That we can refrain from judging
> those religions even though we, as Baha'is, know they are wrong. Is
> that it?
I meant that you seemed to be calling the Covenant *only* the ethical
Covenant and nothing to do with Succession. Both things are important,
and neither can be separated from the other.
Best wishes,
Suzanne
Douglas McAdam
Dear friends-
On the subject of "striving" there are hundreds and hundreds of quotes
referencing our need to strive. Here are a few just from Gleanings
alone and there are many from other books to consider.
Strive that ye may be enabled to manifest to the peoples of the earth
the signs of God, and to mirror forth His commandments. GWB 306
Strive thou day and night to serve the Cause of Him Who is the Eternal
Truth, and be thou detached from all else but Him GWB 248
It is incumbent upon every man of insight and understanding to strive
to translate that which hath been written into reality and action….
GWB 250
They who follow Me must strive, under all circumstances, to promote
the welfare of whosoever will arise for the triumph of My Cause, and
must at all times prove their devotion and fidelity unto him. GWB 207
I think it wise also to consider that while we are encouraged and free
to interpret the Writings for ourselves none of us has the authority
to say we are right and others are wrong in interpretations for only
the Beloved Master is the Official Interpreter.
God bless us all,
doug
Douglas McAdam
well said my friend. I was wondering about something and maybe you
might know of a reference. I recall reading that all the Revealed
Word of God, i.e. all the Writings are part of the Covenant. But I
spent quite a bit of time and could not find a source.
regards,
doug
Suzanne
wrote:
> Hi Suzanne-
> well said my friend. I was wondering about something and maybe you
> might know of a reference. I recall reading that all the Revealed
> Word of God, i.e. all the Writings are part of the Covenant. But I
> spent quite a bit of time and could not find a source.
Hi Doug,
I don't know that passage, but I'm sure it's true. All of the
Writings are written or revealed by someone who is part of the
Covenant, so everything they say is of God.
Here's an interesting passage by Adib Taherzadeh:
"This eternal Covenant of God with man encompasses several
distinguishable forms. The Bahá'í scholar George Townshend, for
instance, has identified seven types of covenant as being subsidiaries
of the eternal Covenant. He outlines them as follows:
"1. The ... Covenant, beginning with Adam and closing with
Bahá'u'lláh, between God and the whole human race.
2. Between God and each Messenger, assigning His Mission.
3. Between a Messenger and the faithful: Covenant of the next (or of a
later) Manifestation.
4. Between the Messenger and the faithful: Ethical Covenant of faith
and obedience.
5. Between the Messenger and the faithful: Covenant of immediate
Successor.
6. Between the Messenger and a disciple.
7. Between the immediate Successor (e.g. the Centre of the Covenant)
and the faithful: i. Covenant of continuing succession ii. Ethical
Covenant" [I-2]
The question of successorship (nos. 3, 5 and 7 in Townshend's
analysis) is of prime importance in the history of religion. A lack of
consensus among the faithful has been one of the major causes of
schism and disunity within religions and is one of the reasons why
each Manifestation of God has been persecuted. This question can be
divided into two aspects: the Greater Covenant and the Lesser
Covenant. The Greater Covenant is that which a Manifestation of God
makes with His followers concerning the next Manifestation. The Lesser
Covenant is the one which a Manifestation of God makes concerning His
immediate successor.
(Adib Taherzadeh, The Covenant of Baha'u'llah, p. 3)
When it says the Covenant in the Baha'i Writings, I get the feeling
that they are talking about about 4, 5 and 7. We have already found
Baha'u'llah and have sworn allegiance to Him, and now we need to stay
faithful to His Writings, and His successors and their Writings and
guidance.
Best wishes,
Suzanne
Douglas McAdam
I had not had a copy of this and will put it in my archives.
I agree with the following you shared-
> When it says the Covenant in the Baha'i Writings, I get the feeling
> that they are talking about about 4, 5 and 7. We have already found
> Baha'u'llah and have sworn allegiance to Him, and now we need to stay
> faithful to His Writings, and His successors and their Writings and
> guidance.
regards,
doug
Baha'i
In many of the places in the writings, the word translated as "strive"
is "jihad" in the original. That is the true meaning of "jihad." The
unworthy have, characteristically, taken a word which has a noble
meaning, and tried to wear its garment. We see the same thing when
murderers claim to be martyrs; when tyrannies claim to be democratic
republics, and so on.
In the Book of Certitude the "true seeker" or true striver after God
in the original is "mojahed" and the plural, true strivers after God,
is mujahedeen. Striving is a holy act. It is wholeheartedness of
effort.
In all of the following passages, "strive" is "jihad" in the original:
O ye lovers of the One true God! Strive, that ye may truly recognize
and know Him, and observe befittingly His precepts.
It is incumbent upon every man of insight and understanding to strive
to translate that which hath been written into reality and action.
Strive, O people, that your eyes may be directed towards the mercy of
God, that your hearts may be attuned to His wondrous remembrance, that
your souls may rest confidently upon His grace and bounty, that your
feet may tread the path of His good-pleasure.
Strive, O people of God, that haply the hearts of the divers kindreds
of the earth may, through the waters of your forbearance and loving-
kindness, be cleansed and sanctified from animosity and hatred,
Strive that haply the tribulations suffered by this Wronged One and by
you, in the path of God, may not prove to have been in vain.
Persian Hidden Word 18. O YE DWELLERS IN THE HIGHEST PARADISE!
Proclaim unto the children of assurance that within the realms of
holiness, nigh unto the celestial paradise, a new garden hath
appeared, round which circle the denizens of the realm on high and the
immortal dwellers of the exalted paradise. Strive, then, that ye may
attain that station, that ye may unravel the mysteries of love from
its wind-flowers and learn the secret of divine and consummate wisdom
from its eternal fruits. Solaced are the eyes of them that enter and
abide therein!
Persian Hidden Words 4. O DWELLERS OF MY PARADISE!
With the hands of loving-kindness I have planted in the holy garden of
paradise the young tree of your love and friendship, and have watered
it with the goodly showers of My tender grace; now that the hour of
its fruiting is come, strive that it may be protected, and be not
consumed with the flame of desire and passion.
69. O CHILDREN OF ADAM!
Holy words and pure and goodly deeds ascend unto the heaven of
celestial glory. Strive that your deeds may be cleansed from the dust
of self and hypocrisy and find favor at the court of glory; for ere
long the assayers of mankind shall, in the holy presence of the Adored
One, accept naught but absolute virtue and deeds of
stainless purity.
In this passage from the Master's Will, "jihad" is translated as
"endeavor":
This body of the Hands of the Cause of God is under the direction of
the guardian of the Cause of God. He must continually urge them to
strive and endeavor to the utmost of their ability to diffuse the
sweet savors of God, and to guide all the peoples of the world...
Brent
drgoplayer
not
actually able to do these things (perfectly). We can only try our
best
(strive) to continually do them a little better each day.
Tom
compx2
You: "When I say striving I definitely do mean performing deeds."
What is the difference between striving to perform good deeds and
performing good deeds? What distinction are we making? Is it your
contention that God looks upon striving the same as doing? How could
trying to build a house, for example, be the same as building a
house? How is trying the same as succeeding? Are you saying that
succeeding is not the point, but rather trying is the issue?
You: "This will bring about our transformation from people who mostly
follow our own egos into people who live more from our higher nature."
I disagree. What makes us who we are is what we do, not what we want
to do, what we think we might do, not what we strive for but rather
what we succeed at. What transforms us is our conscious, deliberate
actions, and the effects of those actions. Sure we fail, so what? We
can be known for our fantastic failures. Those become a part of us,
they are our souls, our spirits, our lives and works. Often it is the
feedback from those actions which reinforces and transforms people.
Thanks for reading. --Kent
Suzanne
> What is the difference between striving to perform good deeds and
> performing good deeds?
Dear Kent,
Did you read all the postings that quoted from the Writings about
"striving"? You seem to be writing this as if you have not, which is
why I am asking.
Striving is trying to do what's right in every situation, which
includes performing good deeds, but also about following all the other
laws and ordinances of God which are not only about deeds.
Kent:
>What distinction are we making? Is it your
> contention that God looks upon striving the same as doing?
It's my contention that God wants us to strive to turn everything
that's been revealed in our Writings into actions. In fact, it isn't
just my contention, but we have cited quotes that say this. You seem
to be trying to discredit striving, but according to our own sacred
Scriptures, the intentention matters a lot, even if we sometimes fall
short and have to pick ourselves up and try again. And maybe the very
fact that we know we are falling short makes us more humble, and less
apt to judge others -- which, according to Baha'u'llah, is one of the
worst things we can possibly do. In fact, it's the only admonition
that I can think of that has the word "accursed" attached to it:
26. O SON OF BEING! How couldst thou forget thine own faults and busy
thyself with the faults of others? Whoso doeth this is accursed of
Me.
(Baha'u'llah: Arabic Hidden Words, Page: 26)
And humility is one of the best qualities we can develop:
"Humility exalteth man to the heaven of glory and power, whilst pride
abaseth him to the depths of wretchedness and degradation."
(Baha'u'llah: Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, Page: 30)
How could
> trying to build a house, for example, be the same as building a
> house? How is trying the same as succeeding? Are you saying that
> succeeding is not the point, but rather trying is the issue?
We may be talking about different things. As far as I'm concerned, we
are talking about developing our spiritual muscles in this world, and
that's a process of trial and error. Of moving forward, and at times
slipping back. It's not as straightforward as building a house.
I am not interested in circular discussions, Kent. If you want to
keep saying the same things, then I have read what you have to say,
and I have said what I have to say on the matter. I guess we have
both made our points.
Best wishes,
Suzanne
drgoplayer
Consider
striving to build a perfect house
vs
building a perfect house.
Which can we do? God builds perfect things. We strive to do that and
hopefully succeed in building better and better things.
Tom
Suzanne
> Hi Kent,
>
> Consider
> striving to build a perfect house
> vs
> building a perfect house.
>
> Which can we do? God builds perfect things. We strive to do that an
d
> hopefully succeed in building better and better things.
>
> Tom
>
Well said, Tom. This is whole gist of the argument in a nutshell.
Suzanne
Douglas McAdam
On Dec 22, 2009, at 12:27 PM, Suzanne wrote:
> We may be talking about different things. As far as I'm concerned, we
> are talking about developing our spiritual muscles in this world, and
> that's a process of trial and error. Of moving forward, and at times
> slipping back. It's not as straightforward as building a house.
>
> I am not interested in circular discussions, Kent. If you want to
> keep saying the same things, then I have read what you have to say,
> and I have said what I have to say on the matter. I guess we have
> both made our points.
Hi Suzanne-
This sort of says it for me my friend.
I sort of think about how the Writings tell us all good is from God
and how even if we may think we are in keeping of the Fast
requirements we may not be inwardly or on the other hand a person
might outwardly fail to keep the Feast but do so inwardly and only God
can judge these actions we strive to take.
The comment about trial and error really echos a lot of what I have
read in that we are fallible critters and thus our behavior pattern is
one of trial and error and for sure all our actions are relatively
good or successful for a certain period or set of conditions. I'm
reminded of that quote about how the good needs of the dear ones are
sins of the near ones (paraphrase).
I recall fondly how hard my children were striving to perform certain
tasks and how we rewarded them even though they did not entirely
succeed. I'm sure that God's Mercy also applies to us as spiritual
children striving as best we can to interpret and apply the Covenant.
Suzanne
> I sort of think about how the Writings tell us all good is from God
> and how even if we may think we are in keeping of the Fast
> requirements we may not be inwardly or on the other hand a person
> might outwardly fail to keep the Feast but do so inwardly and only God
> can judge these actions we strive to take.
Hi Doug,
Yes. I get the idea from my reading of the Writings that good intent
and purity of heart is what matters most to God. The same as your
example about fasting is true about good deeds. Performing good deeds
is wonderful under certain circumstances. From my reading of the
Writings I believe that the sort that would be acceptable to God will
be freely given with no expectations of recognition or reward, and
they won't be something that people go around boasting about. In
short, mostly only God and the people involved know about it, and the
person who performs the deed is humble about it and does it for the
love of God and humanity. God knows this and they do too. This
quote comes to mind:
"The essence of faith is fewness of words and abundance of deeds; he
whose words exceed his deeds, know verily his death is better than his
life."
(Baha'u'llah: Tablets of Baha'u'llah, Page: 156)
If we do good for the sake of our own egos -- so that we will be seen
by others and by ourselves as being someone who does good deeds --
people can sense it and often would rather than we not do it. Also,
if we are not careful, even if we do it for the right reasons, we may
end up doing "good" which doesn't really help anyone. For instance, a
lot of international development programs intend to do good, but they
don't really check with the local people to see what their needs are.
They just assume they know. A lot of money is thrown at various
projects whose end result is disunity. For instance, if you do a
project which helps one little village and not all the other villages
in a country, then they end up with an unfair advantage over the
others and this creates injustice and disunity. If you do it for one
country and not another country, ditto.
So even doing good deeds, even if one's heart is pure, there is an art
to it so that it actually ends up helping and not creating new
problems. This needs to be a process of consulting, doing,
evaluating, and doing some more. And it needs to be inclusive of
those who we mean to help.
Doug wrote:
I'm
> reminded of that quote about how the good needs of the dear ones are
> sins of the near ones (paraphrase).
You had it almost perfect. Just one word different:
"The good deeds of the righteous are the sins of the Near Ones."
(Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 126)
Doug wrote:
> I recall fondly how hard my children were striving to perform certain
> tasks and how we rewarded them even though they did not entirely
> succeed. I'm sure that God's Mercy also applies to us as spiritual
> children striving as best we can to interpret and apply the Covenant.
Yes. I'm sure that he loves our pure-hearted striving, even if we
don't always get it right. And, even when, to all outward
appearances, we are failing, this striving is what's needed to grow
our virtues -- the limbs and members we need in the next world. So
when it's done in the right spirit, there's never a failure.
Certainly not in the eyes of God.
Thanks for your thoughts.
All best wishes,
Suzanne
Suzanne
> I sort of think about how the Writings tell us all good is from God
> and how even if we may think we are in keeping of the Fast
> requirements we may not be inwardly or on the other hand a person
> might outwardly fail to keep the Feast but do so inwardly and only God
> can judge these actions we strive to take.
In thinking some more about this, I remembered this interesting quote
from the Kitab-i-Aqdas:
"...Were anyone to wash the feet of all mankind, and were he to
worship God in the forests, valleys, and mountains, upon high hills
and lofty peaks, to leave no rock or tree, no clod of earth, but was a
witness to his worship - yet, should the fragrance of My good pleasure
not be inhaled from him, his works would never be acceptable unto
God. Thus hath it been decreed by Him Who is the Lord of all....
....Say: The very life of all deeds is My good pleasure, and all
things depend upon Mine acceptance
(Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Aqdas, Page: 31-2)
So the same is true of good deeds as the fast. They are not all
accepted by God. My understanding is that if they are performed in
humility for the love of God and humanity, they are acceptable, but if
they are performed because of our own egos, so that we might appear
superior to others, then they are not. Subduing our egos is the main
thing. And then this quote comes to mind:
"...self has really two meanings, or is used in two senses, in the
Baha'i writings; one is self, the identity of the individual created
by God. This is the self mentioned in such passages as "he hath known
God who hath known himself", etc. The other self is the ego, the
dark, animalistic heritage each one of us has, the lower nature that
can develop into a monster of selfishness, brutality, lust and so on.
It is this self we must struggle against, or this side of our natures,
in order to strengthen and free the spirit within us and help it to
attain perfection.
Self-sacrifice means to subordinate this lower nature and its
desires to the more godly and noble side of our selves. Ultimately,
in its highest sense, self-sacrifice means to give our will and our
all to God to do with as He pleases. Then He purifies and glorifies
our true self until it becomes a shining and wonderful reality.
(Shoghi Effendi: Living the Life, Pages: 18-19)
We all need to struggle to subdue our egos. As long as we are still
struggling, striving, we don't have to be perfect; just in the process
of moving towards perfection. God knows how far we can be expected to
have come by any point in time, and when we aren't really trying. He
also knows what our capacity is, and that would be different from
anyone else's. This is another reason that none of us can judge
others. We don't know such things.
All the best,
Suzanne
compx2
ask about the difference between striving and doing I am engaging in a
circular argument.
I think you both owe me and apology.
--Kent
On Dec 22, 4:43 pm, Douglas McAdam <douglasmca...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
compx2
thing as "striving for perfection in all our actions".
Is that it?
--Kent
compx2
Do you honestly see no difference between striving to build a house
and striving to build a perfect house?
--Kent
> > > Suzanne- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
compx2
I will not address your insulting comments here, but rather try to
stick to the substance of the discussion.
I have read your quotes, of couse. I always do. But as I continually
point out to you, it appears to me Baha'is have built their own
lexicon as to the meanings of words, like in this case "to strive".
Apparently, if I read you and Doug and Tom correctly, to strive is
better than or equal to deeds because it is in the Writings, and you
have the quotes to prove it.
Or am I missing something here?
--Kent
drgoplayer
Why would you think that I would see no difference between a house
and a perfect house? Or striving to build one of each? I did not
suggest that they were the same. This is an odd question
since almost any human would know that there is a difference
between the ordinary and the perfect example of something. Did you
really intend this as a serious question or is it a rhetorical device?
Building a house can be easy or hard. You could start with playing
cards although it will be unstable. This being the Christmas Season
we
could use gingerbread squares. Building a real nice livable house
will be
harder and perhaps beyond the capability of some of us. Building a
perfect house is perhaps beyond the capacity of all of us.
We do things that we can do. We strive to accomplish things that are
at or beyond our ability. Hopefully we increase our ability in the
process
and produce something that is of value if we are striving to do
something
somewhat reasonable. (We can easily think of unreasonable efforts).
Best wishes,
Tom
Suzanne
> I find it insulting that you and Suzanne would suggest that because I
> ask about the difference between striving and doing I am engaging in a
> circular argument.
>
> I think you both owe me and apology.
Dear Kent,
Perhaps you should check with people what they mean before making
assumptions. It doesn't make any sense to say that having a different
understanding is to be engaged in a circular argument, does it? So
obviously that isn't what I meant. I meant that you have given your
point of view on this subject at least twice, and I have given my
point of view on it at least twice, and after a while we both know the
point of view of the other, but nobody's point of view is changing, so
there's no point in continuing on with that particular discussion
unless we have new things to say about it.
And I don't think that Doug was seconding that point, but something
else that I said just before it, but that just happened to still be
tacked on the end.
I realize that this is a Baha'i forum and you're not supposed to write
postings which don't have anything to do with the Baha'i Faith, so I
will quote something about how 'we should consult with one another:
"...The second principle is that of detachment in consultation. The
members of an Assembly must learn to express their views frankly,
calmly, without passion or rancour. They must also learn to listen to
the opinions of their fellow members without taking offence or
belittling the views of another. Baha'i consultation is not an easy
process. It requires love, kindliness, moral courage and
humility..."
(Lights of Guidance, Page: 180)
I am not interested in getting into arguments with you, Kent. I'm
expressly interested in not doing so. You have your opinions and I
have mine. I would agree that we should do good things. However I
also don't see how the quotes on striving can be understood in any
other way than what we have been expressing. If you have another
interpretation, then I'd be interested. But, in principle, I know
that you don't think it's important to strive to do good, but just to
do good deeds. I get that.
Best wishes,
Suzanne
Suzanne
> Hi Suzanne, it appears to me you contend that "striving" is the same
> thing as "striving for perfection in all our actions".
>
> Is that it?
>
> --Kent
Hi Kent,
I appreciate your checking with me what I mean rather than assuming
that you know. Language is a funny thing since it means such
different things in different people's inner universes. You have your
expreriences and thoughts which have colored your opinions about what
a particular thing means, and I have mine.
I do think we need to be striving to live up to the admonitions in the
Writings all the time, but striving can be in anything in which we
have not yet reached perfection. Do you know anyone who is perfect
yet? I have never said that doing doesn't matter. Of course it
does.
It seems to me that this whole discussion started because I said that
we should strive to live out the Writings in our lives, and you
interpreted that to mean that was instead of performing good deeds, or
something like that. It's been a confusing conversation to me, I have
to admit. Of course doing matters and striving matters too. And God
will judge what is acceptable to Him. I don't know what more I can
say that I haven't said already. This is what I mean by a circular
argument.
All best wishes,
Suzanne
compx2
My issue, clearly stated ad nauseum is that the Covenant of God is
dependent on our actions. I am met by all the Baha'is to date who
have answered with something or other about "striving" and I would
like to know if it is Baha'i doctrine as illustrated by pretty much
every Baha'i in the world that striving was as good as doing. To
illustrate that point I gave this example.
Me: "How could trying to build a house, for example, be the same as
building a house?"
You: "Consider striving to build a perfect house vs building a perfect
house. Which can we do? God builds perfect things. We strive to do
that and hopefully succeed in building better and better things."
Me: "Do you honestly see no difference between striving to build a
house and striving to build a perfect house?"
Perhaps you were not addressing the issue of our place in the Covenant
of God in your response because you have gone so far off track now.
But from the perspective of this thread it appeared to me you were
saying striving to build a perfect house was impossible while my issue
was about striving or trying and how that is different from doing.
Obviously my point was that trying to build a house is not the same
thing as building a house and your response appeared to address the
situation on the face of it. But perhaps this is a different
discussion now.
In any case, I think my points have been made and unanswered to date.
--Kent
On Dec 23, 8:42 am, compx2 <com...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Tom,
>
> Do you honestly see no difference between striving to build a house
> and striving to build a perfect house?
>
> --Kent
>
> On Dec 22, 1:12 pm, drgoplayer <tsuki...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi Kent,
>
> > Consider
> > striving to build a perfect house
> > vs
> > building a perfect house.
>
> > Which can we do? God builds perfect things. We strive to do that
an
> d
> > hopefully succeed in building better and better things.
>
> > Tom
>
> > On Dec 21, 5:34 pm, compx2 <com...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Hi Suzanne,
>
> > > You: "When I say striving I definitely do mean performing deeds
.."
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
tsuki190
From: Douglas McAdam <dougla...@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: Covenant
To: bahai...@bcca.org
On Dec 24, 2009, at 4:22 PM, compx2 wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> My issue, clearly stated ad nauseum is that the Covenant of God is
> dependent on our actions. I am met by all the Baha'is to date who
> have answered with something or other about "striving" and I would
> like to know if it is Baha'i doctrine as illustrated by pretty much
> every Baha'i in the world that striving was as good as doing. To
> illustrate that point I gave this example.
Dear Kent-
On one hand it is dependent on our actions and on another it is not
for if we do not do our part Baha'u'llah will raise up a new race of
men. To my understanding we can slow it down or speed it up but we
cannot stop its realization.
I do not know what else any of us can say except that according to the
dictionary striving IS doing.
strive -]make great efforts to achieve or obtain something :
>
> Me: "How could trying to build a house, for example, be the same as
> building a house?"
>
> You: "Consider striving to build a perfect house vs building a perfect
> house. Which can we do? God builds perfect things. We strive to
do
> that and hopefully succeed in building better and better things."
The Writings tell us that perfections are relative and endless. What
might be perfect to you may not be to someone else.
>
> Me: "Do you honestly see no difference between striving to build a
> house and striving to build a perfect house?"
Yes, I see a difference but again it depends on each individuals idea
of what is perfect.
>
> Perhaps you were not addressing the issue of our place in the Covenant
> of God in your response because you have gone so far off track now.
Actually it may be you that is off track because this too is a matter
of individual perception.
> But from the perspective of this thread it appeared to me you were
> saying striving to build a perfect house was impossible while my issue
> was about striving or trying and how that is different from doing.
Striving IS doing.
> Obviously my point was that trying to build a house is not the same
> thing as building a house and your response appeared to address the
> situation on the face of it. But perhaps this is a different
> discussion now.
Of course "trying" is not the same as "doing" but the issue is whether
or not striving is the same as doing and it appears we all but you
believe striving IS doing and that is what the dictionary says too.
>
> In any case, I think my points have been made and unanswered to date.
I think they have been more than amply and accurately addressed but
again this is a matter of individual perception and understanding.
peace,
doug
tsuki190
From: Maureen McCarthy <mmccar...@live.com>
Date: Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 5:35 PM
Subject: RE: Covenant
To: bahai...@bcca.org
Hi, Kent and all! This is my first time to jump in on this discussion
about striving and doing, and I had earlier today decided I didn't
really have time to participate as these discussions deserve so I
asked to be unsubscribed. I don't know when that will go through, but
meanwhile I'm writing this, and individuals are welcome to contact me
personally.
Anyway, what I would say about striving and doing is this: The most
valuable goals require STRIVING--great effort--or they won't be
accomplished. So we could say striving is the means, and
doing/accomplishing is the end result. We need BOTH. Or we could say
that striving is a form of doing, which continues till the goal is
met. But then there are other goals to meet, other results to aim for.
Hope this helps. God bless you all! Maureen
"If a community values its children, it must cherish their parents."
- Dr. John Bowlby
"For this reason must all human beings powerfully sustain one another…"
The reason is that humanity like a tree and "it is needful for the
bough to blossom, and leaf and fruit to flourish, and upon the
interconnection of all parts of the world-tree, dependeth the
flourishing of leaf and blossom, and the sweetness of the fruit."
- Writings of the Baha’i Faith
> To: bahai...@bcca.org
> From: com...@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: Covenant
> Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 13:22:27 -0800
..
> >
> > > > > No, Kent. That is not what I said or meant,, but it is what yo
u
> > > > > misinterpreted of what I said.
> >
> > > > > Perhaps what you mean is that I am
> >
> > > > > > blurring the idea that other religions are good, have good teac
hi
> ng
> > s
> > > > > > and do good things with the idea that those religions might be
ri
> gh
> > t
> > > > > > to do such things. Is that it? That we can refrain from j
ud
> gi
> > ng
> > > > > > those religions even though we, as Baha'is, know they are wrong
..
> > I
> > > s
> > > > > > that it?
> >
> > > > > I meant that you seemed to be calling the Covenant *only* the eth
ic
> al
> > > > > Covenant and nothing to do with Succession. Both things are impor
ta
> nt
> > ,
> > > > > and neither can be separated from the other.
> >
> > > > > Best wishes,
> >
> > > > > Suzanne- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
>
________________________________
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. Get it now.
Baha'i
wrote:
> Hi Brent-
> I really appreciated the quotes and comments you posted.
> Another thought was prompted as I read through those quotes.
> Are there any quotes as to whom the Covenant is binding upon? Does
> the Covenant have an effect on even those who are not Baha'is?
> And is there any quotes regarding what happens to those who do not
> accept Baha'u'llah and obey Him?
By its literal terms, Baha'u'llah covenants with His family: "The
Will of the divine Testator is this: It is incumbent upon the Aghsan,
the Afnan and My Kindred" [to turn to Abdu'l-Baha] (Tablets of
Baha'u'llah, p. 221)
However, Shoghi Effendi calls it "a Covenant of world importance, pre-
existent, peerless and unique in the history of all religions" (God
Passes By, p. 248) and not just dealing with His family. I think
primarily His Covenant is with the Baha'is. However, I think really,
all of His Revelation is addressed to all humanity. "The Promised Day
is Come" outlines the impact of His Revelation on the world, and
elaborates the consequences of rejection of Him. The world suffers
longer.
> Seems like our part of the Covenant is to love all, even those who
> reject Baha'u'llah.
I agree, here are two quotes from Abdu'l-Baha stating that:
A fundamental teaching of Bahá'u'lláh is the oneness of the world of
humanity. Addressing mankind, He says: "Ye are all leaves of one tree
and the fruits of one branch." By this it is meant that the world of
humanity is like a tree, the nations or peoples are the different
limbs or branches of that tree and the individual human creatures are
as the fruits and blossoms thereof. In this way His Holiness
Bahá'u'lláh expressed the oneness of humankind whereas in all
religious teachings of the past, the human world has been represented
as divided into two parts, one known as the people of the Book of God
or the pure tree and the other the people of infidelity and error or
the evil tree. The former were considered as belonging to the faithful
and the others to the hosts of the irreligious and infidel; one part
of humanity the recipients of divine mercy and the other the object of
the wrath of their Creator. His Holiness Bahá'u'lláh removed this by
proclaiming the oneness of the world of humanity and this principle is
specialized in His teachings for He has submerged all mankind in the
sea of divine generosity. Some are asleep; they need to be awakened.
Some are ailing; they need to be healed. Some are immature as
children; they need to be trained. But all are recipients of the
bounty and bestowals of God. (Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith, p.
246)
O ye beloved of the Lord! In this sacred Dispensation, conflict and
contention are in no wise permitted. Every aggressor deprives himself
of God's grace. It is incumbent upon everyone to show the utmost love,
rectitude of conduct, straightforwardness and sincere kindliness unto
all the peoples and kindreds of the world, be they friends or
strangers. So intense must be the spirit of love and loving kindness,
that the stranger may find himself a friend, the enemy a true brother,
no difference whatsoever existing between them. For universality is of
God and all limitations earthly. Thus man must strive that his reality
may manifest virtues and perfections, the light whereof may shine upon
everyone. The light of the sun shineth upon all the world and the
merciful showers of Divine Providence fall upon all peoples. The
vivifying breeze reviveth every living creature and all beings endued
with life obtain their share and portion at His heavenly board. In
like manner, the affections and loving kindness of the servants of the
One True God must be bountifully and universally extended to all
mankind. Regarding this, restrictions and limitations are in no wise
permitted. (The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 13)
However, those with a fixed antipathy to the Manifestation, Shoghi
Effendi says to avoid them, they are unhealthy for us to be around
them.
Brent
Baha'i
The word translated sometimes as strive is also translated as:
Exert yourselves
Bend your energies
Bestir yourselves
Gird up the loins of thine endeavor
Strenuous efforts
Endeavor to the upmost of their ability
Brent
compx2
part.
Our part in the Covenant of God is to do as God asks us to do.
Such a small and insignificant part of what He asks us to do concerns
what Baha'is are always talking about. Baha'is just keep talking and
talking about such strange and obscure issues it seems as though
Baha'is care nothing about what God wants from humanity.
For as long as there has been humanity God has asked from us the same
things. And Baha'i only care about, well, just read this thread about
the most important aspect of God's teachings to humanity, His
Covenant, and you see what Baha'is care about.
I wish there were a religion that cared about the Covenant, about His
teachings, about our lives and our service to humanity. Perhaps God
will raise a new race which will care.
--Kent
Suzanne
> The Covenant is an agreement or contract in which all involved have a
> part.
>
> Our part in the Covenant of God is to do as God asks us to do.
>
> Such a small and insignificant part of what He asks us to do concerns
> what Baha'is are always talking about. Baha'is just keep talking and
> talking about such strange and obscure issues it seems as though
> Baha'is care nothing about what God wants from humanity.
Dear Kent,
It's not true that Baha'is don't care about humanity. The vast
majority of Baha'is are serving humanity in all sorts of ways. You
seem to think that striving to be a better person and to serve better
means the opposite of doing. As people keep saying, striving does
not not mean an absence of doing or caring. It's caring a great deal
about God's will and about hte welfare of humanity, and doing one's
utmost to not only act, but to do so with ever purer motives.
Please, Kent, tell me what is meant in the myriad quotes which have
been cited by Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l-Baha about striving. What do
they mean by the word?
"Strive that your deeds may be cleansed from the dust of self and
hypocrisy and find favor at the court of glory; for ere long the
assayers of mankind shall, in the holy presence of the Adored One,
accept naught but absolute virtue and deeds of stainless purity..."
(Baha'u'llah: Persian Hidden Words, Page: 69)
"Strive then with heart and soul to distinguish yourselves by your
deeds."
(Baha'u'llah: Persian Hidden Words, Page: 76)
Best wishes,
Suzanne
compx2
Perhaps Baha'is just don't know about other religions. I know scores,
if not hundreds, of pious, obdient, charitable, generous people of
lots of religions that have not yet seen in the Baha'i Faith the
qualities of God they see in their own religions. It is not God's
fault, it is not their fault. If there is fault, it is a Baha'i
fault, but that is not my issue. My issue is these people are doing
fine on their own, they are great people, they do exactly what God
wants them to do, and there is no issue of "recognition" that Baha'is
are hung up on.
What does "recognition" look like? I think it looks like piousness,
obedience, charity and generosity. I think God doesn't care what name
He is called. And I think Baha'i responses to this issue are clear
proof that I am right.
You: "You seem to think that striving to be a better person and to
serve better means the opposite of doing."
Nope. Shall I quote myself? Or will you believe me this time when I
repeat that striving means trying, not doing. But if it is your
position that striving means doing I am fine with striving.
You:
> Please, Kent, tell me what is meant in the myriad quotes which have
> been cited by Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l-Baha about striving. What do
> they mean by the word?
That is like asking me what do the Writings mean when they use the
word "piety" or "greatness". Each case is different. As I said
above, if you say striving is doing, as you did in another message,
that is fine with me. Or if you pick quotes about striving with our
deeds, as you did, I have no problem with the use of the word striving
by Baha'is. There are myriad quotes about deeds being our adorning,
not words, If striving is words, or if the Covenant is words, or if
recognition of the One True God is words then those things are of no
account. Only deeds count, even if the words we are talking about are
sacred Baha'i words.
And certainly even you can see that striving that our deeds should be
pure is a very different thing from striving to build a house, which
was our previous example.
Again, thanks for reading. --Kent
drgoplayer
Kent.
It is clear that he is equating striving with not actually doing
anything. That
is a rather unusual interpretation of the word striving. Everyone
else in the
discussion is using the word striving to mean trying to do something a
degree
better each time - to extend our capacity by pushing beyond our
current
abilities.
It is unfortunate that the discussion was sidetracked by this unusual
misunderstanding. Perhaps we can keep in mind how this happens and
avoid some other misunderstandings in the future.
Tom
On Dec 21 2009, 5:34 pm, compx2 <com...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Suzanne,
>
> You: "When I say striving I definitely do mean performing deeds."
>
> What is the difference between striving to perform good deeds and
> performing good deeds? What distinction are we making? Is it your
> contention that God looks upon striving the same as doing? How could
> trying to build ahouse, for example, be the same as building ahouse? H
Suzanne
> Perhaps Baha'is just don't know about other religions. I know scores,
> if not hundreds, of pious, obdient, charitable, generous people of
> lots of religions that have not yet seen in the Baha'i Faith the
> qualities of God they see in their own religions.
I don't think any Baha'is are denying that there are good people in
other religions. Were we even discussing this? But since you mention
it, but, since you mention this, here is a quote attributed to 'Abdu'l-
Baha which I have always liked which talks about how:
"When asked on one occasion: "What is a Bahá'í?" Abdu'l-Bahá
replied: "To be a Bahá'í simply means to love all the
world; to love humanity and try to serve it; to work for
universal peace and universal brotherhood." On another occasion
He defined a Bahá'í as "one endowed with all the perfections
of man in activity." In one of His London talks He said
that a man may be a Bahá'í even if He has never heard the
name of Bahá'u'lláh. He added: --
The man who lives the life according to the teachings
of Bahá'u'lláh is already a Bahá'í. On the other hand, a
man may call himself a Bahá'í for fifty years, and if he
does not live the life he is not a Bahá'í. An ugly man may
call himself handsome, but he deceives no one, and a
72
black man may call himself white, yet he deceives no one,
not even himself.
(Dr. J.E. Esslemont, Baha'u'llah and the New Era, p. 71)
Kent wrote:
> What does "recognition" look like? I think it looks like piousness,
> obedience, charity and generosity.
Maybe. I would like to think so. The above quote seems to say that.
And yet other Writings say other things, and we need to try to
reconcile them all if we are to attempt to truly understand what the
Writings intend. This quote seems to say that good deeds aren't
enough. Conscious knowledge matters:
"Although a person of good deeds is acceptable at the Threshold of the
Almighty, yet it is first "to know," and then "to do." Although 383
a blind man produceth a most wonderful and exquisite art, yet he is
deprived of seeing it. Consider how most animals labor for man, draw
loads and facilitate travel; yet, as they are ignorant, they receive
no reward for this toil and labor. The cloud raineth, roses and
hyacinths grow; the plain and meadow, the garden and trees become
green and blossom; yet they do not realize the results and outcome of
all these. The lamp is lighted, but as it hath not a conscious
knowledge of itself, no one hath become glad because of it. Moreover,
a soul of excellent deeds and good manners will undoubtedly advance
from whatever horizon he beholdeth the lights radiating. Herein lies
the difference: By faith is meant, first, conscious knowledge, and
second, the practice of good deeds."
(Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 382)
Kent wrote:
I think God doesn't care what name
> He is called.
I also don't think God cares what name He is called. I do think He
cares, though, that people come to know His teachings for this Day.
Baha'u'llah compares humanity to a patient and Manifestation of God as
the Divine Physician. Each age has its own afflictions and only the
Physician (Baha'u'llah) has the prescription we need for this age. So
it does matter that people have a chance to hear about Baha'u'llah.
Whether or not they accept or want to know more is completely between
themselves and God, and no Baha'i should judge them. Our task is to
love and to serve and not to judge others.
Kent wrote:
And I think Baha'i responses to this issue are clear
> proof that I am right.
I disagree. If you think that's true, then you have been
misunderstanding the Baha'is and perhaps you have also been
misunderstanding the Writings of the Faith. Baha'is believe what the
Central Figures of our Faith have said, and that is not one simple
statement, but many statements which need to be reconciled which have
a bearing on the subject of the Covenant. Because there isn't one
Covenant but several, as was mentioned earlier. You seem to not like
hearing about the Covenant of succession, but this is a central part
of the Baha'i Writings and is mentioned quite a lot by Baha'u'llah,
'Abdu'l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice. And
it's this Covenant, the Lesser Covenant, which will help us to retain
our unity and retain the purity of the Teachings.
Kent:
> Nope. Shall I quote myself? Or will you believe me this time when I
> repeat that striving means trying, not doing. But if it is your
> position that striving means doing I am fine with striving.
My position is that it doesn't make any sense to either criticize or
have to defend the use of an innocent word like "striving", since it
is used hundreds of times in the Writings.
Kent wrote:
Only deeds count, even if the words we are talking about are
> sacred Baha'i words.
I don't know that this is true. Words can have a huge effect on
people, and the word of God can be transformative:
"Every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God is endowed with
such potency as can instill new life into every human frame, if ye be
of them that comprehend this truth..."
(Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 141)
Best wishes,
Suzanne
compx2
and was met here with such acrimony.
I will quote from "the believe not the person" thread. Here is me:
"It is my contention that 'Abdu'l-Baha said pretty much every idea
and
sentiment found in Promulgation of Universal Peace and Paris Talks,
but Mark
and Susan routinely call those two works "Pilgrims' Notes".
"I am now struck by the fact that the sources you quoted, Susan, do
not say
"Pilgrims' notes" but rather the "degree of authenticity" is
questioned.
That is a far cry from saying they are Pilgrims' notes. Do you have
more
sources that put these works attributed to Abdu'l-Baha into question?
"The issue in my mind is the freedom, no, the command that we all must
read
and think critically for ourselves. I firmly believe the ideas and
feelings
communicated in PUP and Paris Talks are those of 'Abdu'l-Baha, and I
am
entitled to believe that. I believe I can functionally and reasonably
defend
my beliefs. And I am willing to listen to others defend their beliefs,
and
firmly believe in their right not to be convinced by my (more)
reasonable
beliefs.
"The unity of the Baha'i Faith rests upon our individual insistence
that,
apart from the Covenant of Baha'u'llah, all other Baha'i beliefs are
encouraged, even if they are not our own beliefs."
Please comment. --Kent
.. 382)
Douglas McAdam
On Dec 30, 2009, at 6:42 PM, compx2 wrote:
> The Covenant is an agreement or contract in which all involved have a
> part.
Yes, quite true.
>
> Our part in the Covenant of God is to do as God asks us to do.
Yes, I agree and what He asks us to do is to strive to obey the
Covenant.
>
> Such a small and insignificant part of what He asks us to do concerns
> what Baha'is are always talking about. Baha'is just keep talking and
> talking about such strange and obscure issues it seems as though
> Baha'is care nothing about what God wants from humanity.
I disagree. There may be some Baha'is like this and some who think
their interpretations are right and all others wrong but the majority
of all the Baha'is I have known for over 41 years really do care about
what God wants from humanity and they are willing to sacrifice for it.
>
> For as long as there has been humanity God has asked from us the same
> things. And Baha'i only care about, well, just read this thread about
> the most important aspect of God's teachings to humanity, His
> Covenant, and you see what Baha'is care about.
The thread to me appears to be saying just that, that we Baha'is must
strive to obey the Covenant and if we do we are in obedience. We also
know that none of us can judge who is or is not being obedient.
>
> I wish there were a religion that cared about the Covenant, about His
> teachings, about our lives and our service to humanity. Perhaps God
> will raise a new race which will care.
The Baha'i Faith is just that kind of religion to me. There is a
difference between the Divinely Revealed Religion of God and what
believers understand and apply but as far as I have experienced we
Baha'is are indeed striving to be obedient, each in their own way and
degree.
God bless us all,
doug
>
> --Kent
Suzanne
> "It is my contention that 'Abdu'l-Baha said pretty much every idea
> and
> sentiment found in Promulgation of Universal Peace and Paris Talks,
> but Mark
> and Susan routinely call those two works "Pilgrims' Notes".
> Please comment. --Kent
Dear Kent,
Here's a link from a letter from the Universal House of Justice which
talks about the authenticity of the talks of 'Abdu'l-Baha:
http://bahai-library.org/file.php?fileuhj_authenticity_some_texts,
and here's the part about the Promulgation of Universal Peace:
"...Regarding the status of Abdu'l-Bahá's talks published in "The
Promulgation of Universal Peace" and "Paris Talks", original Persian
transcripts of some, but not all, of the talks are available. We
provide the following extract from a letter written on behalf of the
Universal House of Justice which indicates that "in the future each
talk will have to be identified and those which are unauthenticated
will have to be clearly distinguished from those which form a part of
Bahá'í Scripture":
The original of "Some Answered Questions" in Persian is preserved
in the Holy Land; its text was read in full and corrected by Abdu'l-
Bahá Himself. Unfortunately, Abdu'l-Bahá did not read and authenticate
all transcripts of His other talks, some of which have been translated
into various languages and published. For many of His addresses
included in "The Promulgation of Universal Peace" and "Paris Talks",
for example, no original authenticated text has yet been found.
However, the Guardian allowed such compilations to continue to be used
by the friends. In the future each talk will have to be identified and
those which are unauthenticated will have to be clearly distinguished
from those which form a part of Bahá'í Scripture. This does not mean
that the unauthenticated talks will have to cease to be used -- merely
that the degree of authenticity of every document will have to be
known and understood. (23 March 1987)"
The fact that the talks aren't authenticated doesn't mean that we
shouldn't read them and quote from them. However we shouldn't think
that it's a verbatim transcript of what 'Abdu'l-Baha actually said,
since there were people writing them down and people translating, and
no verification by 'Abdu'l-Baha. People do make mistakes. But you
can still get a very good feel for the gist of what 'Abdu'l-Baha said
on those occasions. The way I tend to use them is to say that this or
that passage was "attributed" to 'Abdu'l-Baha.
Best wishes,
Suzanne
compx2
talks represent the thoughts and words of 'Abdu'l-Baha. Do you?
--Kent
[Mod: Clearly the talks represent the thoughts and words of Abdul-Baha but not with complete accuracy. Some key words may be mistranslated.]
compx2
talks represent the thoughts and words of 'Abdu'l-Baha. Do you?
--Kent
Suzanne Gerstner
>> I wish there were a religion that cared about the Covenant, about His
>> teachings, about our lives and our service to humanity. Perhaps God
>> will raise a new race which will care.
Doug wrote:
>
> The Baha'i Faith is just that kind of religion to me. There is a
> difference between the Divinely Revealed Religion of God and what
> believers understand and apply but as far as I have experienced we
> Baha'is are indeed striving to be obedient, each in their own way and
> degree.
I wholeheartedly agree with Doug. Most of the Baha'is I know
are striving to live out the teachings of the Faith in their lives and
are deeply concerned about the will of God and of the well-being
of humanity.
If this thead is a proof to you, Kent, that Baha'is don't care,
then you are misreading and/or misunderstanding
what we have said. I have not gotten that at all. I have gotten
that Baha'is are trying to do better than just what they can do
at present. They are trying to grow and develop spiritual
qualities so that little by little, day by day, their best will be
better and better and their deeds will be "cleansed of
hypocrisy". In a word, they want to be sincere; not worried
about what others think, but only concerned what God and
their own selves think.
It would be easy to make a list of all the good deeds one
has been doing to "prove" to you that we are good Baha'is,
but then we wouldn't be sincere. It's hypocrites who flaunt
their good deeds so that others will know of them and praise
them for it. We are told not to do this:
"The essence of faith is fewness of words and abundance of
deeds; he whose words exceed his deeds, know verily his
death is better than his life."
(Baha'u'llah: Tablets of Baha'u'llah, Page: 156)
You have quoted this too, but you undestand it in a
different way from me. I understand that we ought
not to be talking about our good deeds for the sake
of showing off to others. *This* would be going
against the teahcings of God. A corollary to
this would be that we can't possibly judge that others
aren't carrying out good deeds because they aren't
talking about them. If they aren't talking about them
that could just as easily mean they are being faithful
to the teachings of Baha'u'llah not to talk about them.
God is the Judge. Not us. If we do judge, we are the
ones who aren't being faithful to the teachings of God
not to judge one another. So then who are we to
speak? It always comes back to that. We need to
develop humility not only towards God but towards
one another. You have no idea how God is
estimating any one of us. The people you consider
to be least, He may consider to be best, and vice
versa. You just don't know. None of us do. But
we are commanded to love and be kind to one another.
You talk about it, but I haven't seen it from you in
terms of how you are with other Baha'is. Aren't
Baha'is part of humanity?
Best wishes,
Suzanne
Suzanne
> Your comment does not make it clear whether or not you think those
> talks represent the thoughts and words of 'Abdu'l-Baha. Do you?
>
> --Kent
The fact that themes are repeated so often and are also similar to
themes in authenticated Baha'i Scripture says to me that they are
certainly the thoughts of 'Abdu'l-Baha. The words would be in
Persian, so no matter what we lose something in translation. They
aren't word for word accurate, and aren't considered our Scripture,
but they are part of the Baha'i teachings.
Suzanne
Maureen McCarthy
"If a community values its children, it must cherish their parents." - Dr. John Bowlby
"For this reason must all human beings powerfully sustain one another…"
The reason is that humanity like a tree and "it is needful for the bough to blossom, and leaf and fruit to flourish, and upon the interconnection of all parts of the world-tree, dependeth the flourishing of leaf and blossom, and the sweetness of the fruit.."
- Writings of the Baha’i Faith
> To: bahai...@bcca.org
> From: sb.ge...@ntlworld.com
> Subject: Re: Covenant
> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 12:13:49 -0800
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
Suzanne
> Hi, Suzanne! You said that because Abdu'l-Baha's words were translated, t
hey aren't "word for word accurate." That sounds like anything that is tran
slated can't be considered accurate. Any comments? Thanks! Maureen
Hi Maureen,
I meant that they aren't actually 'Abdu'l-Baha's literal words but a
translation of them. Translations can be very good but they aren't
necessarily perfect, especially between Persian and/or Arabic and
English. Not everything can be said in the same way, so something is
often lost in the translation. That's why Shoghi Effendi didn't just
translate, but actually interpreted a lot of things from the
Writings. This is from an unpublished letter from the Universal House
of Justice about the Guardians translations:
"...The Universal House of Justice, in a letter of 8 September 1964
underlined the uniqueness of the translations of Shoghi Effendi and
provided the following elucidation: ...the beloved Guardian was not
only a translator but the inspired Interpreter of the Holy Writings;
thus, where a passage in Persian or Arabic could give rise to two
different expressions in English he would know which one to convey.
Similarly he would be much better equipped than an average translator
to know which metaphor to employ in English to express a Persian
metaphor which might be meaningless in literal translation...."
But the translation of the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Baha were often done by
someone other than Shoghi Effendi, and they were not able to interpret
as accurately as the Guardian could. I've read that Some Answered
Questions, for instance, needs to be re-translated.
And here is another clue from Shoghi Effendi that not everything is
perfectly translated:
"When studying at present, in English, the available Bahá'í writings
on the subject of body, soul and spirit, one is handicapped by a
certain lack of clarity because not all were translated by the same
person, and also there are, as you know, still many Bahá'í writings
untranslated. But there is no doubt that spirit and soul seem to have
been interchanged in meaning sometimes; soul and mind have, likewise,
been interchanged in meaning, no doubt due to difficulties arising
from different translations. What the Bahá'ís do believe though is
that we have three aspects of our humanness, so to speak, a body, a
mind and an immortal identity -- soul or spirit. We believe the mind
forms a link between the soul and the body, and the two interact on
each other.
(Extract, letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, June 7th, 1946;
Shoghi Effendi, Arohanui - Letters to New Zealand, p. 89)
So I wasn't trying to cast doubts on our Writings. They are
authenticated, uplifting, beautiful, cogent, and amazing. But they
are translations and so not word-for-word what was said in the
original language.
Best wishes,
Suzanne
drgoplayer
In addition to Suzanne's excellent comments on the difficulty and
complexity of translations across languages,
the talks of Abdul-Baha during his travels have an additional
difficulty.
His talks were in Farsi (also called Persian). The translators were
Persian Baha'is who were traveling with him.
They were doing simultaneous translation or close to it - i.e. as He
spoke they repeated his statements in
English (or French, German, etc.). Very fast translation is always
very difficult especially if you do not
fully understand the subject matter. For many of these talks only the
translation was written down, Abdul-Baha's
actually words were often not recorded - in these cases the
translation cannot be confirmed as authentic. At
this point we do not have a published record of which talks have
original Farsi text confirmed by Abdul-Baha and
which do not. Eventually the Universal House of Justice will compile
this (and probably commission new
translations of the ones that can be authenticated) so we will know.
Until then the contents of several popular
books are somewhat unreliable - Paris Talks, Promulgation of Universal
Peace, Tablets of A-B?. Many of these
talks were also reprinted in Baha'i World Faith and the older Baha'i
Scriptures.
Note that they are "somewhat" unreliable. The translations certainly
reflect the spirit and general meaning of
Abdul-Baha's words. They can be used as readings at Feast. However
they cannot be regarded as authentic
scripture. So they are like Pilgrim's Notes but a big step above
that.
As an example you would not want to take Abdul-Baha's talk in
Washington DC where he mentions 'ether' as
any kind of scientific pronouncement as some Baha'is have done. This
would be a situation where the
translator probably did not have a perfect grasp of the subject matter
and might well have made errors. We
have no way to say for sure.
Best wishes,
Tom
On Jan 4, 12:55 pm, Maureen McCarthy <mmccarthy9...@live.com> wrote:
> Hi, Suzanne! You said that because Abdu'l-Baha's words were translated, t
hey aren't "word for word accurate." That sounds like anything that is tran
slated can't be considered accurate. Any comments? Thanks! Maureen
>
> "If a community values its children, it must cherish their parents." - Dr
... John Bowlby
>
> "For this reason must all human beings powerfully sustain one another…"
> The reason is that humanity like a tree and "it is needful fo
r the bough to blossom, and leaf and fruit to flourish, and upon the interc
onnection of all parts of the world-tree, dependeth the flourishing of leaf
and blossom, and the sweetness of the fruit."
>
- Writings of the Baha
’i Faith
>
>
>
> > To: bahai-fa...@bcca.org
> > From: sb.gerst...@ntlworld.com
> > Subject: Re: Covenant
> > Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 12:13:49 -0800
>
> > On Jan 4, 5:31 am, compx2 <com...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Your comment does not make it clear whether or not you think those
> > > talks represent the thoughts and words of 'Abdu'l-Baha. Do you?
>
> > > --Kent
>
> > The fact that themes are repeated so often and are also similar to
> > themes in authenticated Baha'i Scripture says to me that they are
> > certainly the thoughts of 'Abdu'l-Baha. The words would be in
> > Persian, so no matter what we lose something in translation. They
> > aren't word for word accurate, and aren't considered our Scripture,
> > but they are part of the Baha'i teachings.
>
> > Suzanne
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection.http:/
/clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/
Maureen McCarthy
"If a community values its children, it must cherish their parents." - Dr. John Bowlby
"For this reason must all human beings powerfully sustain one another…"
The reason is that humanity like a tree and "it is needful for the bough to blossom, and leaf and fruit to flourish, and upon the interconnection of all parts of the world-tree, dependeth the flourishing of leaf and blossom, and the sweetness of the fruit.."
- Writings of the Baha’i Faith
> To: bahai...@bcca.org
> From: sb.ge...@ntlworld.com
> Subject: Re: Covenant
> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 14:21:45 -0800
Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it now.
Maureen McCarthy
"If a community values its children, it must cherish their parents." - Dr. John Bowlby
"For this reason must all human beings powerfully sustain one another…"
The reason is that humanity like a tree and "it is needful for the bough to blossom, and leaf and fruit to flourish, and upon the interconnection of all parts of the world-tree, dependeth the flourishing of leaf and blossom, and the sweetness of the fruit.."
- Writings of the Baha’i Faith
> To: bahai...@bcca.org
> From: sb.ge...@ntlworld.com
> Subject: Re: Covenant
> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 14:21:45 -0800
Maureen McCarthy
and simulataneous translations that were written down as He spoke. (I think Suzanne also said that we can only consider something Scripture if we have an original text.)
"If a community values its children, it must cherish their parents." - Dr. John Bowlby
"For this reason must all human beings powerfully sustain one another…"
The reason is that humanity like a tree and "it is needful for the bough to blossom, and leaf and fruit to flourish, and upon the interconnection of all parts of the world-tree, dependeth the flourishing of leaf and blossom, and the sweetness of the fruit.."
- Writings of the Baha’i Faith
> To: bahai...@bcca.org
> From: tsuk...@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: translations and talks of Abdul-Baha
> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 15:35:45 -0800
>
> Hi Maureen,
>
> In addition to Suzanne's excellent comments on the difficulty and
> complexity of translations across languages,
> the talks of Abdul-Baha during his travels have an additional
> difficulty.
>
> His talks were in Farsi (also called Persian). The translators were
> Persian Baha'is who were traveling with him.
> They were doing simultaneous translation or close to it - i.e. as He
> spoke they repeated his statements in
> English (or French, German, etc.). Very fast translation is always
> very difficult especially if you do not
> fully understand the subject matter.. For many of these talks only the
> translation was written down, Abdul-Baha's
> actually words were often not recorded - in these cases the
> translation cannot be confirmed as authentic. At
> this point we do not have a published record of which talks have
> original Farsi text confirmed by Abdul-Baha and
> which do not. Eventually the Universal House of Justice will compile
> this (and probably commission new
> translations of the ones that can be authenticated) so we will know.
> Until then the contents of several popular
> books are somewhat unreliable - Paris Talks, Promulgation of Universal
> Peace, Tablets of A-B?. Many of these
> talks were also reprinted in Baha'i World Faith and the older Baha'i
> Scriptures.
>
> Note that they are "somewhat" unreliable. The translations certainly
> reflect the spirit and general meaning of
> Abdul-Baha's words. They can be used as readings at Feast. However
> they cannot be regarded as authentic
> scripture. So they are like Pilgrim's Notes but a big step above
> that..
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
compx2
Here is an example of what I am talking about:
"I desire distinction for you. The Bahá'ís must be distinguished from
others of humanity. But this distinction must not depend upon wealth
-- that they should become more affluent than other people. I do not
desire for you financial distinction. It is not an ordinary
distinction I desire; not scientific, commercial, industrial
distinction. For you I desire spiritual distinction -- that is, you
must become eminent and distinguished in morals. In the love of God
you must become distinguished from all else. You must become
distinguished for loving humanity, for unity and accord, for love and
justice. In brief, you must become distinguished in all the virtues of
the human world -- for faithfulness and sincerity, for justice and
fidelity, for firmness and steadfastness, for philanthropic deeds and
service to the human world, for love toward every human being, for
unity and accord with all people, for removing prejudices and
promoting international peace. Finally, you must become distinguished
for heavenly illumination and for acquiring the bestowals of God. I
desire this distinction for you. This must be the point of distinction
among you."
(Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 190)
This is a quote that has doubt cast upon it by being in a book of
talks from America, not all of which has existent Persian language
original notes. Many wrongly call this an example of "Pilgrim's
Notes" which cast further dispersion on the intent of the author.
I say this is the Covenant of Baha'u'llah: That 'Abdu'l-Baha clearly,
repeatedly and forcefully told us, as Center of the Covenant of
Baha'u'llah, to distinguish ourselves by our acts in His name. In
return we will receive benefits from on high that none can describe.
I think it is just that simple, but Baha'is are screwing it up by
emphasizing an administrative succession as our covenant, and casting
aspersions on commands to be generous and live a good life in service
to others in favor of obeying social prohibitions that mainly serve to
distinguish Baha'is as just plain strange.
I say anyone who is distinguished from others as 'Abdu'l-Baha asks
Baha'is to distinguish themselves will bring such blessings and
benefits on themselves. And Baha'is could do so as well, and in that
way distinguish the Baha'i Faith as the Covenant commands us, if we
would just follow the commands ourselves. We should not cloud the
issues with our arrogance and social teachings. Our spiritual
teachings are as good as any others in the world, if we would just
follow them.
I would love to hear other opinions. And thanks for reading.
--Kent
Douglas McAdam
I concur with your post and just wanted to say that I find that when
any of these so called "somewhat unreliable" quotes are read and I
research the concepts in context with the authentic Writings I find
they make sense. To me there is no way any language can contain or
reflect the reality of the Revealed Word of God and so I take the Word
as a concept and don't get hung up on literalism. Thank God He gave
us the principle of consultation and the purpose of life otherwise we
would be in real serious trouble.
God bless,
doug
drgoplayer
This is a part of what we have called the ethical covenant in this
thread.
Your words suggest that you think it is the entire covenant and that
you
think this is not important to the Baha'is.
Maybe you do not mean that - then it is causing confusion.
On the status of the passage, in my opinion it is probably translated
well
as it agrees with many other passages from Abdul-Baha.
However it must be considered in the context of all the other things
the
writings tell us to do so it is just part of the covenant.
In my experience this is something that most Baha'is hold as a
priority
in their lives. They are not doing a perfect job of exemplifying it
but it is
one of the things they are working at doing better. And in many
cases
their children are greatly surpassing them at it.
Cheers,
Tom
you wrote
>
> I say this is the Covenant of Baha'u'llah: That 'Abdu'l-Baha clearly,
> repeatedly and forcefully told us, as Center of the Covenant of
> Baha'u'llah, to distinguish ourselves by our acts in His name. In
> return we will receive benefits from on high that none can describe.
>
Douglas McAdam
Dear Kent-
I have never run into any Baha'i who casts doubt upon such quotes.
What they usually say it is not Scripture and thus while we are free
to use it we also cannot insist others must use it. We are also free
and encouraged to have our own personal interpretations but advised
too that we should not force our opinions on others.
>
> I say this is the Covenant of Baha'u'llah: That 'Abdu'l-Baha clearly,
> repeatedly and forcefully told us, as Center of the Covenant of
> Baha'u'llah, to distinguish ourselves by our acts in His name. In
> return we will receive benefits from on high that none can describe.
From my understanding that quote and any like it are not what is
meant by the Covenant for only Scripture is included in the Covenant.
But the concepts in that quote to me are part of the Covenant for I
have read similar things in Scripture.
>
> I think it is just that simple, but Baha'is are screwing it up by
> emphasizing an administrative succession as our covenant, and casting
> aspersions on commands to be generous and live a good life in service
> to others in favor of obeying social prohibitions that mainly serve to
> distinguish Baha'is as just plain strange.
I do not know of any Baha'is doing this, but then I don't know what
you mean by "administrative succession" so can you explain further?
>
> I say anyone who is distinguished from others as 'Abdu'l-Baha asks
> Baha'is to distinguish themselves will bring such blessings and
> benefits on themselves. And Baha'is could do so as well, and in that
> way distinguish the Baha'i Faith as the Covenant commands us, if we
> would just follow the commands ourselves. We should not cloud the
> issues with our arrogance and social teachings. Our spiritual
> teachings are as good as any others in the world, if we would just
> follow them.
Not sure what you mean by "cloud the issues with our arrogance and
social teachings". I agree with the arrogance part but not sure why
social teachings of the Baha'i Faith would cloud any issues? Can you
clarify?
Also I would think there is a difference between souls who show
spiritual development in the form of virtues but who have rejected the
Manifestation of God and those who show virtues and have accepted the
Manifestation of God. I think Baha'u'llah made this quite clear in
several quotes.
>
> I would love to hear other opinions. And thanks for reading.
God bless,
doug
>
> --Kent
Maureen McCarthy
"If a community values its children, it must cherish their parents." - Dr. John Bowlby
"For this reason must all human beings powerfully sustain one another…"
The reason is that humanity like a tree and "it is needful for the bough to blossom, and leaf and fruit to flourish, and upon the interconnection of all parts of the world-tree, dependeth the flourishing of leaf and blossom, and the sweetness of the fruit.."
- Writings of the Baha’i Faith
To: bahai...@bcca.org
From: mmccar...@live.com
Subject: RE: Covenant
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 19:00:57 -0500
Thanks, Suzanne! I'm glad you clarified. There IS a big difference between not being "perfectly translated" and not being clarified.
"If a community values its children, it must cherish their parents." - Dr. John Bowlby
"For this reason must all human beings powerfully sustain one another…"
The reason is that humanity like a tree and "it is needful for the bough to blossom, and leaf and fruit to flourish, and upon the interconnection of all parts of the world-tree, dependeth the flourishing of leaf and blossom, and the sweetness of the fruit..."
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
Suzanne
> Hi Suzanne,
>
> Here is an example of what I am talking about:
>
> "I desire distinction for you. The Bahá'ís must be distinguished from
> others of humanity. But this distinction must not depend upon wealth
> -- that they should become more affluent than other people. I do not
> desire for you financial distinction. It is not an ordinary
> distinction I desire; not scientific, commercial, industrial
> distinction. For you I desire spiritual distinction -- that is, you
> must become eminent and distinguished in morals. In the love of God
> you must become distinguished from all else. You must become
> distinguished for loving humanity, for unity and accord, for love and
> justice. In brief, you must become distinguished in all the virtues of
> the human world -- for faithfulness and sincerity, for justice and
> fidelity, for firmness and steadfastness, for philanthropic deeds and
> service to the human world, for love toward every human being, for
> unity and accord with all people, for removing prejudices and
> promoting international peace. Finally, you must become distinguished
> for heavenly illumination and for acquiring the bestowals of God. I
> desire this distinction for you. This must be the point of distinction
> among you."
>
> (Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 190
)
Hi Kent,
That is a lovely quote -- one which I have always found to be
inpirational. It fits very well with other passages in the Writings,
so I would certainly say it's definitely the sentiments of 'Abdu'l-
Baha. Here's a quote from the Guardian which says something quite
similar:
"The chosen ones of God ... should not look at the depraved conditions
of the society in which they live nor at the evidences of moral
degradation and frivolous conduct which the people around them
display. They should not content themselves merely with relative
distinction and excellence. Rather they should fix their gaze upon
nobler heights by setting the counsels and exhortations of the Pen of
Glory as their supreme goal. Then it will be readily realized how
numerous are the stages that still remain to be traversed and how far
off the desired goal lies - a goal which is none other than
exemplifying heavenly morals and virtues."
(From a letter of Shoghi Effendi to the Local Spiritual
Assembly of
Tihran, October 30, 1924: Living the Life, p. 2; Lights of
Guidance, Page: 137)
> Many wrongly call this an example of "Pilgrim's
> Notes" which cast further dispersion on the intent of the author.
Do you believe that all 6 million Baha'is in the world believe the
same thing as two Baha'is who happened to come onto soc.religion.bahai
and said this to you? You seem to have generalized the experience to
being about the masses, and not the few.
> I say this is the Covenant of Baha'u'llah: That 'Abdu'l-Baha clearly,
> repeatedly and forcefully told us, as Center of the Covenant of
> Baha'u'llah, to distinguish ourselves by our acts in His name. In
> return we will receive benefits from on high that none can describe.
I know what you say since you have repeated it often. That is your
opinion, Kent. It's a personal interpretation which excludes the
myriad passages about the Covenant of succession though., Baha'is have
two authorized Intepreters of the Word of God who have expounded on
this theme at great length and have placed a great deal of importance
on it,, so, quite naturally, Baha'is will also speak about what they
said and quote from them. But that in no wise means that they don't
believe you have to live out the teachings of the Faith in their
lives.
I believe we've had this same conversation several times already in
this thread. I know what you believe, and you know what I believe. I
think we're finished with this subject.
Best wishes,
Suzanne
Suzanne
>
> Here is an example of what I am talking about:
>
> "I desire distinction for you. The Bahá'ís must be distinguished from
> others of humanity. But this distinction must not depend upon wealth
> -- that they should become more affluent than other people. I do not
> desire for you financial distinction. It is not an ordinary
> distinction I desire; not scientific, commercial, industrial
> distinction. For you I desire spiritual distinction -- that is, you
> must become eminent and distinguished in morals. In the love of God
> you must become distinguished from all else. You must become
> distinguished for loving humanity, for unity and accord, for love and
> justice. In brief, you must become distinguished in all the virtues of
> the human world -- for faithfulness and sincerity, for justice and
> fidelity, for firmness and steadfastness, for philanthropic deeds and
> service to the human world, for love toward every human being, for
> unity and accord with all people, for removing prejudices and
> promoting international peace. Finally, you must become distinguished
> for heavenly illumination and for acquiring the bestowals of God. I
> desire this distinction for you. This must be the point of distinction
> among you."
>
)
Hi Kent,
That is a lovely quote -- one which I have always found to be
inpirational. It fits very well with other passages in the Writings,
so I would certainly say it's definitely the sentiments of 'Abdu'l-
Baha. Here's a quote from the Guardian which says something quite
similar:
"The chosen ones of God ... should not look at the depraved conditions
of the society in which they live nor at the evidences of moral
degradation and frivolous conduct which the people around them
display. They should not content themselves merely with relative
distinction and excellence. Rather they should fix their gaze upon
nobler heights by setting the counsels and exhortations of the Pen of
Glory as their supreme goal. Then it will be readily realized how
numerous are the stages that still remain to be traversed and how far
off the desired goal lies - a goal which is none other than
exemplifying heavenly morals and virtues."
(From a letter of Shoghi Effendi to the Local Spiritual
Assembly of
Tihran, October 30, 1924: Living the Life, p. 2; Lights of
Guidance, Page: 137)
> Many wrongly call this an example of "Pilgrim's
> Notes" which cast further dispersion on the intent of the author.
Do you believe that all 6 million Baha'is in the world believe the
same thing as two Baha'is who happened to come onto soc.religion.bahai
and said this to you? You seem to have generalized the experience to
being about the masses, and not the few.
> I say this is the Covenant of Baha'u'llah: That 'Abdu'l-Baha clearly,
> repeatedly and forcefully told us, as Center of the Covenant of
> Baha'u'llah, to distinguish ourselves by our acts in His name. In
> return we will receive benefits from on high that none can describe.
I know what you say since you have repeated it often. That is your