From: Juan R Cole <jrcole@umich.edu> Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Subject: Re: Denial of
freedom of conscience in Baha'i (fwd) Date: 22 Oct 1996 19:58:05 -0700
Organization: ----
Lines: 85 Approved: rdetweil@primenet.com (Richard Detweiler) Distribution:
world
Message-ID: <54k1jt$mr@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> X-Posted-By: rdetweil@206.165.5.111
(rdetweil) Path:
zeus.moa.net!news2.acs.oakland.edu!news.tacom.army.mil!news.webspan.net!www.nntp.primen
et.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!not-for-mail
>From
Professor Juan R. I. Cole, Middle Eastern History, University of Michigan:
I guess I am disappointed at the responses that have come in replying to
my plea for greater
open-mindedness in the Baha'i community and for a consideration of where it
might have gone
wrong in departing so vividly from its original ideals, which were not so
different from the
Unitarian Universalism to which I now adhere.
The responses from Baha'is fell into three basic categories. Some
denied that there was any
freedom of conscience or speech in the Baha'i faith to begin with, misusing the
Kitab-i Aqdas to
this end. But Baha'u'llah advocated parliamentary liberties in the
Absolutist Middle East; he
criticized the sort of liberty that led to immorality, but he *advocated* human
rights. So too did
`Abdul-Baha, in Secret of Divine Civilization, A Traveller's Narrative, and his
talks in the West.
`Abdul-Baha explicitly said in his Persian talks in Palo Alto
and Budapest that in the Baha'i
faith there is freedom of thought and speech, but not freedom of behavior, and
that houses of
justice are forbidden to persecute Baha'is on the basis of mere beliefs.
(This does not mean there
can be no criminal speech, such as libel; but `Abdul-Baha did not want
doctrinal disputes to be a
matter for prosecution). In my view, current Baha'i practice has diverged
from `Abdul-Baha's
high ideals. Some maintained that the Baha'i institutions are not
democratic. But Shoghi
Effendi did say they should be democratic in their methods and he said
that the declaration of
conscience by a Baha'i was a right. The word Baha'u'llah used for
consultation of the sort Baha'i
houses of justice were to undertake, mashvirat, was a synonym in the 19th
century Middle East
for parliamentary deliberation, for what we would now call democarcy. All
elective institutions
can run the gamut from being more democratic (with greater popular input,
constitutional
guarantees of individual rights) to being elective dictatorships, what the
German sociologist Max
Weber called Fuehrerdemokratie. I suppose Baha'is have a choice of which
they want their
institutions to be. I know that Unitarian Universalism looks a lot more
genuinely democratic,
and I think it is a superior way of doing things, and IMHO probably closer to
what Baha'u'llah
himself had in mind for the future of religion.
Others, on the basis of no knowledge, accused me of desiring some
sort of high position for
myself. I hope that is not true; I certainly don't believe it to be true,
nor do I believe the record
supports such an allegation. All I wanted was to be free to conduct my
independent
investigation of reality.
A third sort of response expressed a knee-jerk support for whatever the
Baha'i authorities did.
These people have a vision in which those in control of the Administrative Order
can make no
mistakes. They have given up the independent investigation of reality in
favor of blind
obedience, just as the Shi`ites are to blindly obey their ayatollahs. This
mindset in a religious
group is always dangerous, and Baha'is should really ask themselves whether it
is wise to
surrender all their critical faculties to persons about whom they are relatively
ignorant.
`Abdul-Baha seemed confident that if those in authority made an error, and
the community
supported them in it, then eventually the error would be corrected. But
empirical evidence
suggests that in fact for the community always unquestioningly to support those
in power leads
to abuses of individual rights. There is a problem here, which Baha'is of
good faith really ought
to seek to address.
Some kind persons did express their gratitude (which I certainly do not
deserve) for some of the
provisional translations I did while I was a Baha'i. Those who wish to see these
may do so at a
Web site I put up, https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm
. My Web page can also be
found by looking me up by name in Lycos or Altavista.
I forgive those individuals who made serious charges against me,
precipitating my resignation
from the Baha'i faith. They thought they were doing something
admirable. I continue to admire
much in the Baha'i religion, and wish my Baha'i friends
well. But you really could all learn a
lot from more seriously considering the Unitarian Universalist principles I
posted.
Sincerely,
Juan Cole
Homepage
|