Baha'i Rants - Latest Comments in Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Lea — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 00:17:28 -0000

Imagine a UHJ that said to this question "we do not have the authority to define proselytizing, as this would be the same as interpreting the Writings of Baha'ullah and no one has the authority to do this after the Guardian. We do not feel the way teaching is being done currently is the same as what Baha'u'llah intended by proselytizing, but Bahai's are free to consider the matter and act according to their own conscience after considering the question for themselves."

The UHJ is Interpreting the words of Baha'u'llah differently than the dictionary definition or the common definition. Clearly the UHJ is interpreting the sacred Writings, and I seriously doubt they have the God given authority to do so.

I would encourage the "unenrolled" Bahai's, and those who are in the Faith and quiet about what concerns us, need to pray for the UHJ, not just complain about them. God has promised to guide the UHJ, but not necessarily on every decision. If we are Baha'i, enrolled or unenrolled, we have to have faith that Baha'u'llah can do as He said He would do, and take us from this most dark night and into the light. From where we are now, it is hard to imagine how God will revive His religion, guide his House, but if you believe in Baha'u'llah, you know that He will find a way.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Lea — Sat, 14 Jun 2014 17:51:49 -0000

I feel it is disrespectful of the UHJ to ask Bahai's to do something that Shoghi Effendi felt was undignified. It is disrespectful to Shoghi Effendi, and it is disrespectful to the Baha'is of the world. It was disrespectful to me. It was disrespectful to the non-Bahai neighbors. I am not allowed to see with my own eyes or know with my own knowledge regarding if it is dignified in my own neighborhood. I am just told to trust that the UHJ is better than that of Shoghi Effendi, in knowledge and judgement, all evidence to the contrary.

in regard to the question: The UHJ would have been right if they had said "we have not the authority to define proselytizing as Baha'u'llah intended it, because we have not the authority to interpret scripture for the Baha'is."

The UHJ definition of proselytizing is far from the common definition of the word, or even the dictionary definition.

Can the UHJ define all the words in the writings of Baha'u'llah that are not that which the common and dictionary definition, or does the UHJ intend to ignore His holy writings by redefining words on an as needed basis?

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

teacherinchina — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 19:52:03 -0000

I am teaching Accounting in China, no proselytizing.Nice blog though.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

farhan — Thu, 28 May 2009 05:22:40 -0000

Thanks, Nikhil, I entirely agree with your vision of teaching, which is permeated throughout the Institute Process, even though some years back, some inexperienced new-comers in the field of service did adopt attitudes of superiority that have been entirely quenched by now.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Craig Parke — Thu, 28 May 2009 02:01:39 -0000

Nikhil,

Thank you for your post. All very good points and all completely worthy insights. But what to are saying here is bottom up OLDTHINK in the BAO. In the current top down NEWTHINK BAO what you are saying here is treason. Keep it up and you will get a file opened on you in Haifa and put under 24/7/365/1000 surveillance for thought crimes. Be very careful about what you say.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Nikhil — Wed, 27 May 2009 18:19:05 -0000

A few thoughts... (though i didn't go thru all the comments so maybe these points have already been made):

1. I wish the word teaching hadn't been used - unfortunately in society it has such a negative, hierarchical connotation, that it creates a certain barrier. If one goes through the writings, I think it becomes clear that the spirit of "teaching" is really "sharing" - and this i think differentiates it from proselytization. Proselytizing has a clear purpose - to convert. Sharing, on the other hand, is just openly, directly, talking about things that mean a lot to you with others. There is no expectation of change in the other person - if they show interest, you continue, if not, you leave it at that. I believe that's the spirit in which teaching is truly meant to be done in the faith. Of course, Baha'is are imperfect individuals (just like everyone else), and few probably live up to this standard.

2. Teaching is something that is not meant to be just from a Baha'i to a non-Baha'i, but between Bahai's too - in fact, the foremost attitude in a society where everyone is "teaching" everyone else is a culture of learning. And so we should all be attempting to learn from each other. Of course, when we "teach" someone, it is not to be from a standpoint of superiority, but rather one of humility, and of sharing sincerely trying to, together, come to a better understanding of truth.

3. This view of teaching is closely related to the Baha'i view of education in general as not the filling of empty vessels, but rather the mining of gems that already exist within each individual. This clearly puts the "teacher" in a role of service rather than one of superiority.

At this point in history, when in most cultures people are still uncomfortable talking about spirituality openly, I think even this notion of sharing one's beliefs openly can come across as being too pushy. However I think that the Baha'i vision really is for a world where people on the whole are more spiritual, more keen to learn from each other, and more open in sharing their spiritual beliefs with others. In such a milieu, we would all be "teaching" each other, as well as learning from each other.

All this being said, its important to reiterate that Baha'is are of course imperfect like everyone else - so its important not to take the actions of Baha'i people as a standard for the teachings. As Abdu'l Baha once said, the biggest test for Baha'is will always be other Baha'is :)

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

farhan — Sat, 16 May 2009 06:04:30 -0000

Baquia wrote: Please note that I’m being extremely gentle in this regard because had there been such success, all Baha’is would have heard about it in great detail. … if with all these advantages, Ruhi can not provide significant results that prove its efficacy beyond a doubt in its native country of Colombia… then by what rationale should we expect it to suddenly start to succeed now? … and especially in other, much more hostile cultures? …Trees that yield no fruit have been and will ever be for the fire.

Baquia, I have no agenda and neither time, nor any of your competence and artistic talent for setting up a blog. After going back to the Willow Creek link, I noticed that I had been there three weeks ago without remembering the name and any connexion with the comments above that concluded your usual diatribe against Ruhi and your scepticism on the contents of the UHJ letter.

You haughtily attribute this lack of attention to insincerity. I already explained that under Internet Explorer, my wide PC screen at work often freezes and when it works, Intense debate asks me to break down my comments to shorter ones. My 13” laptop with Firefox, works better, although I have trouble finding the initial comment, and reading is more tedious and I will be getting new glasses next week.

Once again, if you want to “see the money” you should participate in the activities and notice the change in attitude and behaviour. What I can say for my own self is that after the learning experiences of mass entry in the 1970s where I understood that the immaturity of the Baha’i community did not allow us to welcome large groups, I decided to resort to indirect teaching, including with my own children. I am now much more at ease for welcoming people into all the activities made available through the institute process. This I can attest, but not show in cash. You can show leaves and fruits of a tree, but not its roots: a matter of faith and belief.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Baquia — Thu, 14 May 2009 09:51:04 -0000

owen, If someone comments without referencing or addressing what is on the blog once? - fine. Twice? ok. Three times? still alright. But continuously? Then it is a pattern of behavior which gives away their true goal.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

owen — Thu, 14 May 2009 09:27:09 -0000

well, to be fair baquia, I read the 'show me the money' post 2 or 3 times with great interest when you first posted it and i didn't remember what willow creek was until i followed the link

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Baquia — Tue, 12 May 2009 11:03:21 -0000

pey, book 8 was supposed to be completed in 2008 but as with all such projects it is running late. I have a work in progress copy of the translation and it seems to gloss over the more bumpy historical facts and present the Covenant in more or less the same sanitized light as you suggest.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

pey — Tue, 12 May 2009 09:07:18 -0000

Another thing about Ruhi. Has anyone ever seen Book 8 (covenant). I've heard it hasn't been published yet in English. I'm really curious how they (whosever interpretation) lay it out in the book to indoctrinate. Will it be a thorough explanation or a glossing over of Abdul-Baha's Will and Testament and the many uncomfortable quotes from Shoghi Effendi about the living Guardian as head of the UHJ? My gut instinct says the latter.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Craig Parke — Tue, 12 May 2009 03:39:49 -0000

The one thing about Ruhi that was spot on was the part about lying. (But I was raised a Lutheran and I must say the Lutheran Catechism based upon the Ten Commandments was actually much better in scope.) Of course, as per form in the Ruhi Books, the text was blatantly grounded in someone's personal opinion twist extrapolation about lying several times removed from the actual Scripture of the Faith. But the thought association was basically true to anyone who has lived very long on this planet. Especially in the 20th Century. The problem with liars is that they start to believe their lies. Once that starts total self delusion is the end game as everything goes into free fall. Why doesn't the AO practice what it preaches? The stats of the Faith are lies. There is no other way to say it. They just do not hold up to true scrutiny and analysis. Why don't we just start there with trying to practice what we preach?

"Lies and the lying liars who tell them". Always a good show on Jerry Springer or Oprah.

Telling the truth begins at home. Otherwise it all ends in a web of mind bending self delusion decade after decade and then century after century.

The answer is fierce term limits at every level in the AO. You tell lies and you are voted out of office on your head.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

pey — Tue, 12 May 2009 01:19:57 -0000

I just got a bit of information that I never knew. It sheds light on how the Bahai administration hypes up statistics. Did you all know, that at least in the US, whenever a Bahai travels abroad "for any reason", if the National knows about it, then that individual is counted as a travel teacher? Amazing! My friend basically explained that they justifiy this because they say that a Bahai is always a teacher wether he opens his mouth to actually teach or not. So wether he's going to a country just to vacation on a beach or do some business transactions- we'll still count him as a teacher. So all those years I'd open up the American Bahai and see "wow, so many 'teachers' going out into the world" was really hyped up stats. Makes me wonder how much of Farhan's stats are calculated in the same manner.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Baquia — Mon, 11 May 2009 10:37:00 -0000

Farhan,
The fact that you have never heard of Willow Creek proves that you do not read this blog and are not here to engage in a dialogue but to advocate for your own agenda unilaterally. It is beyond rude and akin to going to a dinner party but then taking over the host's kitchen to make your own food. You are welcome here to comment but if you'd like to put forward your own ideas, irrespective of what I write, then start your own blog. There are many free options: blogger, wordpress.com, livejournal, etc.
re sincerity, not at all. The two are not mutually exclusive - just as a hypochondriac is sincere in believing they are going to die (and yet wrong).
re your deleted comment: in case it had escaped your attention, you comment a lot here. A lot. At times this requires that I aggregate your comments into one (from a number of fragmented comments that has gone as high as 5 within an hour's span). The erased comment was one which was moved and aggregated to another of your comments. I even wrote you an email explaining this and assuring you that your comments were not erased but grouped. Needless to say, I do not appreciate the insinuation in the least.
finally, it isn't so much scatological vs. flowery language but having a sense of humor while directly addressing an issue vs. sophistry and obfuscation.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

farhan — Sat, 09 May 2009 02:32:25 -0000

Grover wrote: I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder
Of course, Grover and expressed in other words:

“Yea, to the beetle a sweet fragrance seemeth foul, and to the man sick of a rheum a pleasant perfume is as naught.” (7 Valleys p 21)
And again : “Yea, the abject beetle can never scent the fragrance of holiness, and the bat of darkness can never face the splendour of the sun.”(Iqan p118)
“…these souls, vile and miserable as the beetle itself, have had no portion of the musk-laden breeze of eternity, and have never entered the Ridvan of heavenly delight. How, therefore, can they impart unto others the imperishable fragrance of holiness?”(Iqan 123)

But fortunately, this is not a permanent curse and God loves us, His children, and offers us the opportunity to grow spiritually out of an abject situation:

“Cleanse thou the rheum from out thine head and breathe the breath of God instead.”(Rumi quoted in 7 Valleys p 21)
“At this hour, so liberal is the outpouring of Its grace that the holy Spirit itself is envious! It hath imparted to the drop the waves of the sea, and endowed the mote with the splendour of the sun. So great are the overflowings of Its bounty that the foulest beetle hath sought the perfume of the musk, and the bat the light of the sun.” (Iqan p 60)

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

farhan — Fri, 08 May 2009 20:19:46 -0000

Baquia, to continue replies, I have never heard of the “Willow Creek experience” I have provided some statistics, although there is no reason why I should be providing evidence for what should be your personal experience with the institute, any more than I need to produce evidence that pioneering, fasting or prayers are good. Those who don’t like it do something else.

Baquia : did you know that the same courtesy isn't extended by other Baha'i bloggers?

Farhan: I agree this is an immature behaviour which will disappear as we grow. BTW I have had one comment removed here a week ago.

Baquia: I do not doubt your sincerity nor your aspiration to be a good Baha'i.

Farhan: Thank you for accepting me as sincere; this means you consider me as perhaps over refined, poet, idealist or snob, but not a sophist.

Baquia: Mui's excavations of ruined business plans led him to conclude that a wise organization vigorously questions its own clever ideas; dissent is encouraged, and skepticism is built in.

Farhan: I agree with this, otherwise I would not be here. But once again, there is a time, a place, and a manner for expressing diverging ideas.

Baquia: What does that mean if we don't actually use our minds to engage in critical thinking and ask questions? How degenerate when the mere act of asking questions is reduced to blasphemy!

Farhan: I agree: a very childish behaviour out of which we need to grow and in which you seem to have outgrown us.

Baquia: He or she is the authority! You do not question the doctor! You automatically obey.

Farhan: You remind me of Milgrain’s experiment; this is a daily struggle for me in a very complex profession that resorts to ultra conservatism to face the challenges and is then unable to change, leading to riots I refered to a year ago. The Faith went through this when Shoghi Effendi introduced the AO in 1929, and again the UHJ when the institute was introduced, changing some of the AO structures. You might have read Alvin Toffler’s “Future Shock” where he explains the limits of our adaptability to change.

Baquia: Getting back to our present discussion, it seems to me that we are two different nurses. You are ready to turn the patient over and administer the 'medicine'.

Farhan: it took me over a year of painful study before I fully understood the purpose of the institute, of which Ruhi is a tool, and to see how so many out of blind and sincere obedience were making mistakes which have now been overcome with splendid results.

As to my wish to be a good doctor or a good Baha’i, I am eager to see the results and have outgrown the need for approbation or acceptation form anyone. I am regularly astonished at how often in messages here people feel the need to measure themselves to others, see who is dominating who, instead of seeing ourselves as brothers and sisters helping each other develop under the shadow of the same Father.

If you have further points, please bring them up one by one and we will discuss them.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

farhan — Fri, 08 May 2009 19:46:08 -0000

Baquia, We seem to agree that numerical results do not reflect the essential rise in the spirit of love, enthusiasm and efficiency of the community which characterise growth. I have recently witnessed this growth it the national convention here, you can do so by mingling in the activities wherever you are, whatever your status.

The community is much more engaged in doing exciting activities rather than producing figures If you wish to have details of the UHJ Ridvan letter, you ask for them at the BWC and not through me. As promised, here are some figures, gleaned from a 35 page report, dating back to Feb 2009 when the 97 clusters in France were: 4 A, 5 B, 67 C and 21 D.

In 165 BE, 4 clusters had moved from B to A, 5 from C to B. The total number of seekers enrolling in France in 165 EB has been 120, a rise by 3%, as compared to 164 EB. 73% of these were in priority groups. 63% of these new-comers have started the Ruhi sequence.

In Feb 2009, 552 seekers were participating regularly in core activities, an increase by 24% as compared to 164 EB which was in itself 20% higher than 163 EB. During the period 164-165EB, 51.4% of believers had started the Ruhi sequence, as compared to 49% the previous year, the total number having completed the full Ruhi sequence so as to serve as tutors, rising from 312 to 347, i.e. by 11%. 18% of those having completed the sequence actually started their own study circle, as compared to 16% in 164.

The number devotional meetings during this period rose by 37% as compared to the rise of 5% the previous year and the participation rose by 26% as compared to 20% in 164EB (30% in priority groups).
In the 1990’s it was estimated that less than half of the children from Baha’i families in Europe became active in the Faith. We will need some time to determine the results, but we can already say that in France, 61 children’s classes are being run, 41% of children being those of seekers, as compared to 29% the previous year, with a rise of 9% in volunteers formed at running children’s classes through Ruhi book 3 against a 5% rise in 164 EB.

The 27 pre-youth groups (a 25% rise in 165 EB) welcome 150 participants, (a 41% rise in 165 EB and 37% rise in 164 EB), 63% of participants being seekers There has been a 30% rise in potential animators having acquired skills through Ruhi book 5.
Hope this is helpful; if you get global results from the BWC, please share.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Grover — Fri, 08 May 2009 18:10:02 -0000

Well, I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder - what is pretty flowers to you, and acceptable in a Baha'i sitting, is manure to everyone else. Must be a real benefit when it comes to sitting on one of those smelly portable toilet that all you see and smell are pretty flowers, where as everyone else sees it for what it is - crap. You'd make a great proctologist!

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

farhan — Fri, 08 May 2009 17:19:56 -0000

Grover wrote: So I guess in your round about way, you are saying that you are a dispenser of manure

No Grover, I am saying that those who use scatological vocabulary are attracted to the same, and that they are irritated by my flowery language

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

farhan — Fri, 08 May 2009 13:15:19 -0000

Craig wrote: I cannot grasp your analogy here?

Dear Craig, the phenomenon of life, whether mineral, biological, or social evolves naturally towards disintegration or entropy; the phenomenon of integration or negative entropy whic converts compost into flowers is "improbable" and for many, including myself, involves intervention from a higher level of existence. In a garden, some organisms such as flies and worms are involved in helping disintegration, preparing compost, and others like butterflies and bees are involved in pollinisation and fostering plant growth. They are all doing “God’s work” but attracted to different jobs. It is the same in society: some are attracting attention to dysfunctions, others are trying to construct. It so happens that on this blog, those attracting attention to dysfunctions are frequently using a scatological vocabulary. And some of these refer to my posts as "sugar coated c..p" I hope you dreamt of butterflies, flowers, fields and perfume and not of compost.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Grover — Fri, 08 May 2009 02:36:31 -0000

So I guess in your round about way, you are saying that you are a dispenser of manure (BS, rhetoric, buzz words, and sophisms) and we are the gad flies or whatever that are attracted to that manure, feast upon it, tear it to bits (through logical and rational argument and sometimes verbal abuse) and eventually contribute to your manure spouting pretty flowers (i.e. everyone else recognises that you are full of manure and looks elsewhere for wisdom).

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Craig Parke — Fri, 08 May 2009 02:17:27 -0000

Farhan,

With all due respect, I cannot grasp your analogy here? It is making my head hurt! So I guess I had better go to bed as it is the dead of night here and then try to read it again in the morning to see if I can understand it. "Sugar-coated manure" is not a good image before bed time! But maybe I will have some interesting dreams?

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

farhan — Fri, 08 May 2009 01:28:34 -0000

Baquia, thanks for honouring me with this long post to which I will soon reply point-by-point, hair-by-hair. I have received the French statistics on paper and I will copy some figures, but I am sure the ITC would be happy to provide details of the more than 1000 intensive growth programmes around the world. France is only engaged in 9.

As to your comment about proctology, you are once again referring to an area of human activity very commonly referred to in messages on your blog. In a garden, flies are attracted to manure, and bees to flowers. Both do God's work in the garden. Some consider reality as sugar-coated manure, I consider reality as biological machine converting manure into flowers, a negative entropy enterprise converting disruption and decay into organisation and beauty.

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Baquia — Fri, 08 May 2009 00:49:18 -0000

Farhan, I've looked but I can't find a recent comment where you have actually responded to something I've written. Perhaps I've missed it so please point it out to me. For example, let's take this thread to which you've commented repeatedly. Where do you address any of the number of points that I have raised? the Willow Creek experience? the cultural framework in relation to Ruhi? or about my query regarding the efficacy of Ruhi? After much back and forth, you begrudgingly said that you would provide some evidence (after previously giving an ethereal response that the 'evidence is everywhere'). And we're still waiting.

As you have no doubt noticed by now, you are welcome here to exchange ideas. But I have yet to see you actually engaged in a dialogue which even remotely resembles addressing a point or issue that is raised on the blog. But while all are welcome here to exchange ideas in a fruitful manner, did you know that the same courtesy isn't extended by other Baha'i bloggers? That if you disagree with them they censor your comments and erase them?

I do not doubt your sincerity nor your aspiration to be a good Baha'i. What I do notice is that we approach life from different perspectives. For example, consider this research done on business organizations:

"After researching more than 750 major business failures in great depth, we came to the conclusion that humans are wired for poor decision-making," says Chunka Mui, a co-author of Billion-Dollar Lessons. "Ego, sunk costs, emotions, self-interest, etc., lead to blind spots. The not-so-intelligent have the same issues, it's just that the stakes are lower". Mui's excavations of ruined business plans led him to conclude that a wise organization vigorously questions its own clever ideas; dissent is encouraged, and skepticism is built in.

Now of course, a business organization is different from a Baha'i institution. But not that different. They are made up of human beings, with the same frailties, engaged in gathering information and making decisions to arrive at a goal. The mistake that we make is to take deference to authority to an obscene level. There is much wisdom in the Bab's naming of a whole month after Questions. And in Baha'u'llah's in keeping the name. What does that mean if we don't actually use our minds to engage in critical thinking and ask questions? How degenerate when the mere act of asking questions is reduced to blasphemy!

If I may, I'd like to share with you a story from the medical field which may shed some light on our two separate approaches. Perhaps you've already read "Medication Errors: Causes and Prevention" by Cohen & Davis. In it the authors delve into the process errors that creep into the practice of medicine. In one case, they provide the example of a doctor who, after diagnosing a patient, wrote instructions for the nurse to administer ear drops to the patient's right ear. Of course, being in a hurry, the doctor scribbled: "place in R ear"

The nurse promptly put the requisite amount of ear drops in the patient's rectum. Now the nurse wasn't stupid. She knew that ear medicine shouldn't go into the rectum. But she had been conditioned by years of experience that you do whatever the doctor says. He or she is the authority! You do not question the doctor! You automatically obey.

Getting back to our present discussion, it seems to me that we are two different nurses. You are ready to turn the patient over and administer the 'medicine'. While I'm over here shaking my head saying, it doesn't make sense. Before we insert Ruhi into the Baha'i community... let us pause and ask whether this is the right thing to do. Now, you may be right. After all, as Paul Lample said, what do our pyramids look like in our clusters?

But then again, if our clusters look like pyramids, it is high time to consult a good proctologist.

(ps you may have the last word on this and other matters. when it comes to sophistry I can not hope to ever equal your skill)

Re: Teaching vs. Proselytizing: UHJ Letter

Grover — Fri, 08 May 2009 00:24:02 -0000

Wow Baquia! Such sharp wit! and you tell me off for being frank!

From Wiki -A sophist is a user of sophisms, i.e., an insincere person trying to confuse or deceive people. A sophist tries to persuade the audience while paying little attention to whether his argument is logical and factual.