Re: To listen and explore the possible answers...


<smaneck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1131854735.957458.16990@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> Dear John,

> On that basis you could challenge the entire Guardianship!
I do, frequently. Seriously, I think the best example that indicates that the
central leadership of our Faith is under some sort of protection is that
somehow the 'Guardianship' which is so clearly not one of the Teachings of
Baha'u'llah was dumped in the dustbin without at any point requiring a
recantation or refutation of Abdul-Baha, or any insurrection against Him or
Shoghi.
>
>
> However,
> there are other places where Abdu'l-Baha speaks much more specifically
> of the Universal House of Justice. I gave one example because Steve
> only asked for.

I know but Steve asked for specific examples for a real reason ( I assume).
You gave a specific example and on examination it seemed to me that firstly
the 'teaching' from Abdul-Baha was not centrally about the issue concerned and
that secondly Alison's remark was not really opposed to it (though I admit I
haven't seen Alison's remark in context).

> *** there are other passages which attest to the
> infallibility of the House of Justice which Alison denies.

again a general remark about Alison's views. The only writing by Alison I've
seen on the topic was an essay (which Steve said was dated after her
expulsion) which asserted that those who associated 'The Most Great
Infallibility' with the UHJ were guilty of shirk (is that spelt right?). As
the "...the Most Great Infallibility is confined to the One Whose station is
immeasurably exalted beyond ordinances or prohibitions and is sanctified from
errors and omissions" this does not appear to be contentious in the Baha'i
context though I'm sure other understandings are possible.
Have you any specific examples of Alison deviating from this teaching?
Actually, I'd be absolutely astonished if a determined researcher can't come
up with something that Alison (or me or you or Peter Khan or anyone else)
wrote that seems to deviate from at least one quote in the Writings. None of
us are perfect or perfectly knowledgeable. But I've yet to see any evidence
of significant, repeated, deliberate, opposition to the Teachings from
Alison.

You then gave a selection of extremely hyperbolic statements from Abdul-Baha
about the House. I agree that in the light of these statements, and more
importantly what Baha'u'llah Himself said, that the House has authority and
the right to obedience. I don't think I see anything in those particular
statements that implies it is infallible in any of the various meanings of
that word that are bandied about.
Some of Abdul-Baha's phrases there are also severely out of context. For
example "The substance is, that prior to the completion of a thousand years,
no individual may presume to breathe a word.". Looked at in context, this
appears to be a reference to people not being able to claim a Revelation for a
thousand years though even that is made confusing by the usual mumbo-jumbo
about a year meaning a thousand tears etc which religious people seem to take
seriously. Try it in context:

"33. O servant of God! We have noted what thou didst write to
Jinab-i-Ibn-Abhar, and thy question regarding the verse: 'Whoso layeth claim
to a Revelation direct from God, ere the expiration of a full thousand years,
such a man is assuredly a lying impostor.'

The meaning of this is that any individual who, before the expiry of a full
thousand years -- years known and clearly established by common usage and
requiring no interpretation -- should lay claim to a Revelation direct from
God, even though he should reveal certain signs, that man is assuredly false
and an impostor.

This is not a reference to the Universal Manifestation, for it is clearly set
forth in the Holy Writings that centuries, nay thousands of years, must pass
on to completion, before a Manifestation like unto this Manifestation shall
appear again.

It is possible, however, that after the completion of a full thousand years,
certain Holy Beings will be empowered to deliver a Revelation: this, however,
will not be through a Universal Manifestation. Wherefore every day of the
cycle of the Blessed Beauty is in reality equal to one year, and every year of
it is equal to a thousand years.

Consider, for example, the sun: its transit from one zodiacal sign to the next
occurreth within a short period of time, yet only after a long period doth it
attain the plenitude of its resplendency, its heat and glory, in the sign of
Leo. It must first complete one full revolution through the other
constellations before it will enter the sign of Leo again, to blaze out in its
full splendour. In its other stations, it revealeth not the fullness of its
heat and light.

The substance is, that prior to the completion of a thousand years, no
individual may presume to breathe a word. All must consider themselves to be
of the order of subjects, submissive and obedient to the commandments of God
and the laws of the House of Justice. Should any deviate by so much as a
needle's point from the decrees of the Universal House of Justice, or falter
in his compliance therewith, then is he of the outcast and rejected.

As to the cycle of the Blessed Beauty -- the times of the Greatest Name --
this is not limited to a thousand or two thousand years....

When it is said that the period of a thousand years beginneth with the
Manifestation of the Blessed Beauty and every day thereof is a thousand years,
the intent is a reference to the cycle of the Blessed Beauty, which in this
context will extend over many ages into the unborn reaches of time."







.