From: “Mark A. Foster”
Subject: Consultation
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 1995 01:27:44 -0600 (CST)
To: talisman@indiana.edu

Hi, Terry -

Thank you for your message. As I see it, unity (in diversity), as expressed in consultation, in social evolution, etc., is the spiritual technology, or methodology, to reach truth. That is why, I think, we are told to obey our assemblies even should we have reason to believe that what they say may not, at least from one’s own particular perspective, be the truth. Of course, individuals are free to privately appeal a decision to a higher institution so long as they do not stir up dissension (disunty) in doing so.

As I see it, God blesses actions performed in the spirit of unity. If we unite with an administrative decision, obeying it out of loyalty to the Centre of the Covenant (Who watches over assemblies), we can, I believe, trust that, through our own unity with the assembly, the truth of the situation will eventually be found, and any injustices will be righted.

Private assessments of truth may or may not be valid and, as we know, we often change our views of what is true as we continue to deepen in the Teachings. If each one of us maintained her or his right to engage in public behavior according to one’s own determination of the truth, in spite of administrative guidance, what the House referred to as “administrative unity” would be sacrificed for the sake of contemporary secular notions of “individual rights and freedoms.”

One of my difficulties with the views put forth by some persons on this list is that they seem to approximate Weber’s Western liberal critique of Marxian radicalism. Personally, my sympathies lie more on the side of spiritual radicalism (such as with Pitirim Sorokin). Weber had a love-hate relationship with bureaucracy, but he recognized its many faults and was obviously fearful of the direction to which it might eventually take the West. However, to me, the *real* and *enduring* solution to the problems we face in the West cannot be found primarily in bureaucratic reform, or in improving formal organizational efficiency (though it couldn’t hurt), but in radically changing the narrative structure from one based on the symbol systems of the old order to one based on the discursive framework of the Baha’i Teachings.

At the heart of this new framework, IMO, is the Baha’i metaphysic of unity in diversity. Consultation requires not only that one be frank and open but that one look for truth as it emerges through the process of, in this case, consulting, in what I would regard as acceptable settings (such as in private correspondance or in district conventions), with the appropriate administrative institutions. That is my view, and, in the spirit of consultation, I certainly have no wish to enforce it on others.

I agree with you, in general, about the World Order of Baha’u'llah being an “irfan republic,” as you call it. Certainly, as you say, the Baha’i system is not just administration. The polity is the form; but without the spirit of faith, it will be of no use. However, as I think I have mentioned to you before, I would suggest that it might be useful to add a third “house” to the conception, making it a trinity of Houses of Worship, Houses of Justice, *and* Houses of Finance (a.k.a. the local storehouse to be administered by the “trusted ones” of each local community). IMV, the economy of a community is on par with the other two in importance (i.e., the life-blood of a community) and, in common practice, it, too, plays a central role in the Nineteen-Day Feast.

For what it’s worth, as a former journalism major (undergraduate degree), my first letter to the Universal House of Justice (mid 1970s) asked it about journalism and freedom of the press. (I misplaced both the original letter and the response - pre-email days.)

In my opinion, it is simply too early to know the precise role for a free press in a Baha’i system. However, my guess is that it will involve a high degree of mutual trust and respect.

Since Baháʾuʾlláh, through ʿAbduʾl-Bahá, conferred infallibility upon the Universal House of Justice (and upon the Guardian), Baháʾuʾlláh would know what that means. In my opinion, we should simply accept it, reflect upon it, and avoid imposing our own views on others. Our primary focus should, I feel, be upon the authority given to the Universal House of Justice.

The Universal House of Justice determines its own areas of authority. Our own duty is obedience.

The Millerites, followers of William Miller and ancestors of the present-day Adventist churches (including the Seventh-Day Adventists), anticipated the Second Advent of Jesus Christ sometime between March 21, 1843, and March 21, 1844. After that time span concluded, and Jesus had not yet returned, Miller revised the date to April 18, 1844. Later, Samuel S. Snow changed it to October 22, 1844, which, when unfulfilled, became known, in Adventist circles, as the Great Disappointment.

The Campers (as I call them), followers of Family Radio’s Harold Camping, believe that they will be (or, depending on your time of reading, believed that they were supposed to be) raptured (miraculously translated or transported to Heaven) on May 21, 2011. The next five months would witness tremendous worldwide suffering. Then, on October 21, 2011, the entire universe would be destroyed. A new heaven and a new earth would be created in its place.

Although I find the proposition of a rapture, as understood by Camping and by many other Christians who reject Camping’s date setting, to be erroneous, the concurrence between Camping’s rapture and my own view of the Great Unraveling is, in my view, fascinating. The dates set by the Millerites were, for whatever reason, reasonably close to the Declaration of the Báb (May 23, 1844). Perhaps “the Campers” are, like the Millerites, approximately correct regarding the time frame but inexact concerning the specific events.

Reference Materials

http://www.bahaistudies.net/asma/the_end_of_the_world.pdf

http://www.bahaistudies.net/asma/judgement_day_feared_by_the_world.pdf 

http://www.bahaistudies.net/asma/no_man_knows.pdf 

http://www.bahaistudies.net/asma/5-21-2011.pdf 

http://www.bahaistudies.net/asma/we_are_almost_there.pdf 

http://www.bahaistudies.net/asma/ebiblefellowship.pdf 

http://www.bahaistudies.net/asma/we_can_know.pdf 

Perhaps the best evidence against absolute, “essential” truth is that there are so many different truth claims and so many different religions. If there were such a thing as absolute, essential truth, one might not observe such diversity.

It is a feeling, a product of the opening of my heart through meditation, not an intellectual prediction: I have observed the humbling effect of the Japanese tsumani (that, as a friend has suggested to me, no first-world country is safe), revolutions in the Middle East, and the war against Libya. In my humble opinion, “the great unraveling,” a term which simply occurred to me in recent days, has begun.

Death is joyful, if one is prepared, but pain and suffering are tragic. Sadly, many people are not prepared. They are waiting on a rapture (to be transported to heaven before the great unraveling), a messiah, or for 2012. As I told two friends of mine last year, I have had, since then, strong feelings about universal catastrophes beginning in February or March of 2011. I hope I am wrong.

Similarly, social networking has replaced the substance of human relationships, whether electronically or face to face, into a superficial texting. The substance is gone. As Marshall McLuhan apt observed, the medium is the message.

Jesus taught his own commandments. He encouraged people to follow Himself, not Moses. However, when he was addressing Jews, he encouraged them to follow their own commandments. (It was better than nothing.)

Jesus came to Jews, in the sense that he fulfilled their prophecies. However, I see no evidence that he came just to Jews. So-called gentiles were incorporated into Israel. There was no distinction between Jew and Greek.

The Sabbath, for instance, is not an “essence.” It is a name for the seventh day. Therefore, the sabbath might be different days for different people. Whatever is the seventh day, at the end of one’s work week, is, by definition, the sabbath.

I do not assume that God micromanages the world. He can help us in the midst of our suffering. However, He does not necessarily prevent us from suffering.

It occurred to me that there are some similarities between the Sārwarī Qādirīyah Ṣūfī Order of Ḥaḍrat Sulṭān Bāhū (17th century) and the Bratslav Ḥasidim of Ribbi Naḥman (18th-19th centuries). Naḥman did not establish a Ḥasidic dynasty. Similarly, Bāhū did not appoint a successor. Instead, he counseled people to read his books. Each of these movements is, in a sense, a countercultural (almost anarchist) social expression in its own respective tradition.

To believe in textual inerrancy is to rob a writer of her or his humanness or personhood.

Scroll down to the bottom of the page to sign the guestbook.

Here is the difference, classically, between emanation and manifestation: Emanation is like the painting coming from the painter. Manifestation is like the reflection of the painter in a mirror.

I watched a fascinating program on 60 Minutes (from July 25, 2010). It dealt with a radical Islāmic ideology called The Narrative. Briefly, its proponents contend that the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are part of a larger plan to kill all Muslims.

Sadly, not pointed out in the piece are two significant points:

1. The manner in which many people on the rabid right wing flame the fires of hatred. Remember, for instance, Ann Coulter saying:
   

   We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren’t punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That’s war. And this is war.

2. The similarities between The Narrative and certain versions of the Illuminati Conspiracy, which contend that there is a global conspiracy to establish a one-world government, and to lock up all Christians (in prisons which have supposedly been already built for that purpose) or to take away their freedoms.

Many of the people who accept both the Illuminati Conspiracy and its Islāmic variant are not uneducated people. They have not, however, been adequately trained how to think properly.

Iftār is an opportunity for gratefulness, perhaps not unlike the celebrations of Thanksgiving in the United States and Canada, and it can be a time for fikr, thought and reflection, on what one has learned and absorbed during the fasting period.

Sikhism is one of a number of different expressions of the Hindu Sant Tradition, i.e., Sant Mat. These include:

1. Sikhism, e.g., http://aboutsikhism.org/

2. Kabir Panth, e.g., http://www.sahibbandgi.org/

3. Surat Shabd Yoga, e.g., http://www.santmat.net/

4. Dadu Panth, e.g., http://www.santdadu.org/aboutus.htm

Sant Mat developed in the context of the diverse Hindu and Muslim population of the Indian subcontinent. It beliefs reflect both Hindu and Muslim (particularly Sufi) influences.

Concerning the place of Sant Mat in the context of the Bahá’í Faith: Although I am not aware of any statements which establish the stations of Guru Nanak, Kabir, or any of the other personages connected with Sant Mat, I would suggest that it can perhaps be seen as a uniquely Indian religious reform movement.

I do not believe it is really possible for humans to predict the future, as in the psychic practice of precognition. The prophecies of the Prophets are not predictions, in the ordinary sense. Rather, they are statements of what may or shall conform to God’s Will.

The Bahá’í Faith presents, in my view, a prima conventus, not a sola conventus, approach to sacred texts. My distinction between prima and sola conventus is analogous to that between prima scriptura and sola scriptura. In other words, while the Sacred Texts, with their interpretations (by Abdu’l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi) and legislative elucidations (by the Universal House of Justice), are authoritative, other views may be accepted, albeit provisionally, as well.