Issues Related to the Study of

         the Baha’i Faith:

Extracts from Letters written

  on behalf of the Universal

         House of Justice

 

 

 

 

 

Published as a supplement to the May 1998 issue of Baha’i Canada by the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of Canada

 

[1]        10 December 1992

 

The House of Justice understands that there are certain Baha’i scholars, such as yourself, who experience difficulties with the policy of re­view,  but it finds the cause of the difficulties to lie in areas that are different from those you identify.  It would point to the following as being the principal roots of the problem:

 

1. Too narrow and limited understanding of the Faith and its Teachings on the part of certain Baha'i scholars.  There has been a tendency to specialize in certain narrow areas and neglect the wider understanding of the Teachings which would not only enrich their souls but illuminate their perception of the specific areas of their study.

 

2. An attitude to the Faith and the Administra­tive Order which is strongly coloured by an assumption that the Cause of Baha’u’llah is similar to other religions and organizations, is afflicted by the attitudes which have too often characterized them, and is motivated by unethi­cal considerations.  The institutions of the Cause are regarded with the same suspicion as the traditional "establishment".  This produces a failure to understand, let alone accept, the points which the Universal House of Justice itself is striving to convey.

 

3. An assumption that only a person equipped with conventional academic training is capable of an unbiased attitude and of truly understand­ing the points at issue, leading to disdain of questions raised by "unqualified" individuals.

 

4. Failure to use the appeal processes of the Cause by scholars who are faced with what they regard as improper and unjustified questioning of their writings by Baha'i reviewing commit­tees.  It is natural that, in the present stage of the development of the Cause, the members of reviewing committees will, from time to time, err in their views or be unreasonably obtuse.  Such errors and attitudes should be overcome through discussion between the author and the members of the committee.  If this does not lead to a satisfactory outcome, the author can appeal to the National Spiritual Assembly itself and, if even that does not solve the matter, to the Universal House of Justice.

 

5. The above attitudes, in turn, lead to an inability on the part of those scholars to de-scribe the review process to their non-Baha’i colleagues in terms that would not be unaccept­able in an academic environment.

 

            Your suggestion that an “imprimatur” system such as used by the Roman Catholic Church would be preferable to the present system of review was considered by the House of Justice, and it has asked us to explain to you the problems that this would present.

 

            First of all, it would convey to the reader the false impression that the attitude of the Faith was similar to that of the Roman Catholic Church, summoning up visions of an "index" of prohibited reading, and all the other associations which you can undoubtedly imagine for yourself.

 

            Secondly, it would give force to the erroneous concept that there are two kinds of Baha'i litera­ture- books which present the "official" view and those which are the free personal opinions of individual Baha'is, thus obscuring the essential Baha'i differentiation between the Writings of the Bab and Baha’u’llah, those of' Abdu'l-Baha, the letters of the Guardian and the decisions of the Universal House of Justice, which are authorita­tive, on the one hand, and all other writings by Baha'is on the other, which have no authority at all apart from their own internal reasonableness.  That a book has passed review in no way guaran­tees its correctness; it is merely an assurance by the National Spiritual Assembly concerned that, in its view, the book does not seriously distort the Faith or its Teachings.

 

            Thirdly, it would obscure the important fact that the process of review in the Baha’i Faith is temporary, being limited to this stage of its devel­opment when books published by Baha’is could seriously mislead the public if they too gravely distort its message.

 

            Your proposal that a National Spiritual As­sembly which detected major inaccuracies in an article published by a Baha'i in an academic journal could ave the Research Department "write a letter to the concerned journal pointing out and listing these inaccuracies, giving the requisite textual evidence in footnotes", that journal editors would be "quite willing to entertain such corre­spondence" and that it would be found that Baha'i scholars would be "grateful for chance to discuss such issues freely" introduces a new kind of discrimination and interference.  Baha'i institu­tions very seldom write to journals to correct their statements about the Faith; not only do they not wish to promote public disputes with those who write about the Cause, but the correction of such errors is seldom worth the time and effort neces­sary.  In the coming years there will be numerous non-Baha’is, ranging from those who are bitter enemies of the Cause to those who are its warm advocates, publishing articles about it.  There is no way  in which Baha'i institutions could write cor­rections of the multitudinous errors that will be published-, how, then, would they be justified in writing to correct only the errors perpetrated by Baha'i authors?

 

            The House of Justice suggests that you consider the following steps through which the schol­ars of the Faith can overcome the problems which some of them perceive as presented by review of their publications.

 

C         Let them accept unreservedly that 'Abdu'l-­Baha was right in instituting the temporary system of review, and that the decisions of the Guardian and the Universal House of Justice to not yet eliminate the system are in accordance with the Divine will.

 

C         Let them recognize the fundamental differ­ence between errors propagated by Baha'is from those issuing from non-Baha'i sources.  The review system is not an attempt to prevent errors or attacks on the Faith from being pub­lished; it is an attempt to prevent Baha'is from promulgating them in their published writings.

 

C         Let them strive to understand the wisdom of this policy and its true nature, and to present it in its proper light to their fellow-academics....

 

C         Let Baha'i scholars look upon their fellow Baha'is with trust and affection, not with dis­dain as to their qualifications and suspicion as to their motives.  Let them regard them as de­voted Baha'is striving to perform a service which the policies of the Faith require of them.  And let them not hesitate to discuss openly with such reviewers the points which they raise.  If it appears that a National Spiritual Assembly does not permit such open discussion, let them appeal to the Universal House of Justice for clarification of the situation.  It is well under­stood by the Universal House of Justice that in some cases the process of review works ineffi­ciently and with problems.  These deficiencies could be overcome if the scholars themselves would collaborate with the process and openly raise questions about its functioning, rather than fostering an atmosphere of antagonism and mutual mistrust.

 

C         If the question of review is raised by non-Baha’i academics, let the Baha'i academics say that in this early stage in the development of the Faith this is a species of peer review which they welcome, since it is primarily among their fellow-Baha'is that they would find at this time those who would have sufficiently wide and deep understanding of the Faith and its Teach­ings to raise issues of importance which they would want to consider before publication.  Of course, to be able to say this with sincerity, the scholars must have been able to accept the other steps mentioned above.

 

            You cite the case of Baha'is in other fields of expertise, such as Baha'i physicians who, you say, “may pursue their professions as Baha'is with no prospect of interference by Baha'i institutions".  This is hardly the case.  All Baha'is are subject to Baha'i law and Baha'i standards.  It would clearly be unacceptable for a Baha'i doctor to advocate abortion as a method of birth control and set up a clinic for that purpose, or for a Baha'i psychiatrist to publicly advocate sexual intercourse before marriage.

 

            Baha'u'llah was addressing all of us when He wrote: "Were any man to taste the sweetness of the words which the lips of the All-Merciful have willed to utter, he would, though the treasures of the earth be in his possession, renounce them one and all, that he might vindicate the truth of even one of His commandments, shining above the Dayspring of His bountiful care and loving-kind­ness" and "Whoso hath inhaled the sweet fra­grance of the All-Merciful, and recognized the Source of this utterance, will welcome with his own eyes the shafts of the enemy, that he may establish the truth of the laws of God amongst men."

 

            Finally, the House of Justice wishes us to say that it fully agrees with your statement that it is important for the Faith to attract intellectuals and, indeed, all people of capacity in any field.  Baha'is who themselves are intellectuals can contribute signally to this process, but not by ignoring the basic standards of faith and conduct that apply to all believers or by depicting the Baha’i adminis­tration as a bureaucratic hindrance to freedom of thought and expression.

 

 [2]       5 October 1993

 

            With regard to the current policy of advance review, all Baha'is, whatever their professions, are challenged to reflect on the implications of our common struggle to achieve Baha'u'llah's purpose for the human race ' including the use of our intellectual resources to gain deeper understanding of that Revelation and to apply its principles.  In pursuing this course that has been set for it so explicitly and emphatically by its Founder, the Baha’i community acts through the institutions that He has provided.

 

            Scholarly endeavours are not an activity apart from this organic process, answering to standards and operating on authority outside it.  The House of Justice believes that part of the difficulty that some Baha'i academics are having with the ques­tion of prepublication review may arise from the fact that, in their scholarly work, such believers do not see themselves as full participants in this process, free to act with the spiritual autonomy they exercise in other aspects of their lives.  What the Baha'i community is engaged in bringing into visible expression is a new creation.  In this, the Cause has urgent need of the unfettered and whole­hearted assistance of its scholars.  The House of Justice has sought to point out that, as in every other field of Baha'i endeavour, there are certain conditions under which this assistance may be rendered, conditions implicit in the nature of the process and made explicit in the Divine Text.

 

            These requirements are of course not reflected in the standards currently prevailing in Western academic institutions.  Rather, both Baha’i institu­tions and Baha’i scholars are called on to exert a very great effort, of heart, mind, and will, in order to forge the new models of scholarly activity and guidance that Baha'u'llah's work requires.  The House of Justice believes that you will serve the interests of the Faith best if you will direct your thoughts to this end.  Merely to reiterate the con­ventions and requirements of systems which, whether academic, political, social, or economic, have been shown not to have adequate answers to the anarchy now engulfing human society, or any willingness to come to grips with the implications of their impotence, is of little practical help.  We do a grave disservice to both ourselves and the Faith when we simply submit to the authority of academic practices that appeal for their claim of objectivity to theories which themselves are being increasingly called into question by major think­ers.  While non-Baha’i academics may slip care­lessly into regarding the institutions founded by Baha'u'llah as simply another form of "religious establishment"' and avoid serious examination of the truths of His Revelation in this fashion, it is clearly impossible for anyone who is a Baha’i to follow them down this empty track.

 

            The House of Justice is aware that the con­tinuation of the policy of review can cast a shadow on the good name of the Faith in the eyes of certain non-Baha’i academics.  In an environment where publication is vital to advancement and recogni­tion, any requirement that delays or inhibits this activity must be a matter of grave consideration, not only by the individual scholar but by the governing institutions of the community that ea­gerly watch his rise and count anxiously on his effective assistance.  But is that not precisely the kind of spiritual dilemma being faced by many Baha'is in their efforts to serve Baha'u'llah's purpose? On many occasions, in developing lands particularly, believers of capacity have had to forgo opportunities for promising political ca­reers, careers whose value they could easily have justified on the basis of public service, because such a choice was not in conformity with Baha'u'llah's teaching and purpose.  There are, likewise, many examples of believers who have had to set aside both a professional life and legiti­mate family concerns in order to pioneer in inhos­pitable regions of the globe.

 

            It is apparent that the crisis of contemporary civilization is impelling thinkers in many lands to explore new scholarly methodologies capable of coming to grips with spiritual, moral, cultural, and social phenomena not hitherto encountered.  No segment of humanity is so well equipped as the Baha'i community to take a leading role in this effort.  As a body of people who are being steadily freed by the Revelation of Baha'u'llah from the "gravitational pull", so to speak, of the cultures in which their habits of mind have been formed, the community already has a unique approach to the exploration of reality.  This approach needs to be sharply honed as an ever more effective instru­ment of social transformation.  The devising of the new scholarly paradigm called for by this circum­stance offers a priceless opportunity of service and achievement to those Baha'is who enjoy the dual gifts of spiritual faith and intellectual facul­ties trained in the best that contemporary society has to offer.

 

            The Universal House of Justice can only in­vite Baha’i scholars, as it invites all other believ­ers, to respond to this historic challenge, in what­ever way and to whatever extent each person considers possible.  It is confident that, in Baha'i scholarship as in all other areas of Baha'i service, the essential resources will gradually be forth­coming and the required models of research and study will be refined through the process of con­sultation.  It is this achievement, the House of Justice believes, that in the long run will best protect the reputation of the Cause from whatever immediate misunderstandings and criticisms it may encounter.  Indeed it is greatly encouraged by the response that Baha'i scholars in many fields are already making.

 

[3]        5 October 1993

 

            You may be confident that the House of Justice is sympathetic to the need of Baha’i scholars for ever-increasing access to important Baha’i archival sources such as the original texts of historical documents like The Dawn-Breakers.  Indeed, it is difficult to imagine how these servants of the Cause, whose contributions to its advancement and the protection of its inter­ests are vital, will otherwise be able to discharge their role.  Nor is it necessary to urge on the House of Justice the importance to the interests of the Faith of a general spirit of openness about its scriptural and historical sources.

 

            At present, the World Centre lacks the human resources, physical space, and research facilities necessary to respond adequately to this need.  All of us look forward eagerly to the day when the Centre for the Study of the Texts will have come into existence in the building on the Are designed for it and now under construction, and will be in a position to assemble the archival and research facilities which the Cause urgently requires.  We are sure that if you will respond in this perspective to inquiries about access to Baha’i primary sources you will be able largely to relieve the kinds of doubts which you describe having encountered.  To propose, as some have done. that the best

course in the meantime is simply to open the World Centre's archives to visiting Baha’i schol­ars who possess appropriate credentials is not realistic.  Were the Archives, the Library, and the Research Department to divert energy and atten­tion to the reception of the many researchers who would feel a legitimate right to come, their priority tasks in vital support of the work of the House of Justice, including preservation, classification, translation, annotation, and publication, would suffer to a degree that is not acceptable at this stage in the growth of the Cause.  As is so often the case in many fields of research, scholars inter­ested in work on the Faith will have to exercise a measure of patience.

 

[4]        19 October 1993

 

            The House of Justice suggests that the issues raised in your letter might best be considered in light of the statements in the Baha’i Writings which disclose the relationship between the Revelation of Baha’u’llah and the knowledge which is acquired as a result of scholarly en­deavours.  Baha’u’llah asserts that:

 

Unveiled and unconcealed, this Wronged One hath, at all times, proclaimed before the face of all the peoples of the world that which will serve as the key for unlocking the doors of sciences, of arts, of knowledge, of well-being, of prosperity and wealth....

 

            It is evident that the Baha’i Writings illumi­nate all areas of human endeavour and all aca­demic disciplines.  Those who have been privi­leged to recognize the station of Baha’u’llah have the bounty of access to a Revelation which casts light upon all aspects of thought and inquiry, and are enjoined to use the understanding which they obtain from their immersion in the Holy Writings to advance the interests of the Faith.

 

            Those believers with the capacity and oppor­tunity to do so have repeatedly been encouraged in their pursuit of academic studies by which they are not only equipped to render much needed services to the Faith, but are also provided with the means to acquire a profound insight into the meaning and the implications of the Baha’i Teach­ings.  They discover also that the perceptions gained from a deeper understanding of the Revelation of Baha’u’llah clarify the subjects of their academic inquiry.

 

            It is useful to review a number of statements written by Shoghi Effendi on this subject.  To a believer who had completed advanced academic studies in a subject related to the Teachings the Guardian stated, in a letter written on his behalf

 

It is hoped that all the Baha’i students will follow the noble example you have set before them and will, henceforth, be led to investigate and analyse the principles of the Faith and to correlate them with the modem aspects of phi­losophy and science.  Every intelligent and thoughtful young Baha’i should always ap­proach the Cause in this way, for therein lies the very essence of the principle of independent investigation of truth.

 

            When he was informed of the enrolment of a scientist in the Faith, the response set out in the letter written on his behalf was:

 

We need very much the sound, sane, element of thinking which a scientifically trained mind has to offer.  When such intellectual powers are linked to deep faith a tremendous teaching potential is created....

 

            His secretary wrote, on another occasion, that:

 

Shoghi Effendi has for years urged the Baha’is (who asked his advice, and in general also) to study history, economics, sociology, etc., in order to be au courant with all the progressive movements and thoughts being put forth today, and so that they could correlate these to the Baha’i teachings.  What he wants the Baha’is to do is to study more, not to study less.  The more general knowledge, scientific and otherwise, they possess, the better.  Likewise he is con­stantly urging them to really study the Baha’i teachings more deeply.

 

            In the simultaneous endeavour to pursue their studies and to delve deeply into the Baha’i Teach­ings, believers are enjoined to maintain a keen awareness that the Revelation of Baha’u’llah is the standard of truth against which all other views and conclusions are to be measured.  They are urged to be modest about their accomplishments, and to bear in mind always the statement of Baha’u’llah that:

 

The heart must needs therefore be cleansed from the idle sayings of men, and sanctified from every earthly affection, so that it may discover the hidden meaning of divine inspira­tion, and become the treasury of the mysteries of divine knowledge.

 

            At this early stage in the development of the Faith, it would not be useful to propound a highly restrictive definition of the term "Baha’i scholar­ship".  In a letter written on behalf of the House of Justice to an Association for Baha’i Studies re­cently, it is stated that-.

 

The House of Justice advises you not to at­tempt to define too narrowly the form that Baha’iI scholarship should take, or the approach that scholars should adopt.  Rather should you strive to develop within your Association re­spect for a wide range of approaches and en­deavours.  No doubt there will be some Baha’is who will wish to work in isolation, while others will desire consultation and collaboration with those having similar interests.  Your aim should be to promote an atmosphere of mutual respect and tolerance within which will be included scholars whose principal interest is in theologi­cal issues as well as those scholars whose interests lie in relating the insights provided by the Baha’i teachings to contemporary thought in the arts and sciences.

 

A similar diversity should characterize the endeavours pursued by Baha’i scholars, ac­commodating their interests and skills as well as the needs of the Faith.  The course of world events, the development of new trends of thought and the extension of the teaching work all tend to highlight attractive and beneficial areas to which Baha’i scholars might well direct their attention.  Likewise, the expansion of the ac­tivities of the Baha’i International Community in its relationship with United Nations agencies and other international bodies creates attrac­tive opportunities for scholars to make a direct and highly valued contribution to the enhance­ment of the prestige of the Faith and to its proclamation within an influential and recep­tive stratum of society.  As the Baha’i community continues to emerge inexorably from ob­scurity, it will be confronted by enemies, from both within and without, whose aim will be to malign and misrepresent its principles, so that its admirers might be disillusioned and the faith of its adherents might be shaken; Baha’i schol­ars have a vital role to play in the defence of the Faith through their contribution to anticipatory measures and their response to defamatory accusations levelled against the Faith.

 

            Thus, there should be room within the scope of Baha’i scholarship to accommodate not only those who are interested in theological issues and in the historical origins of the Faith, but also those who are interested in relating the Baha’i Teach­ings to their field of academic or professional interest, as well as those believers who may lack formal academic qualifications but who have, through their perceptive study of the Teachings, acquired insights which are of interest to others.

 

            Since you have raised the question of whether physics is more than tangentially related to Baha’i issues, you might consider the following com­ments of a well-known scientific thinker, who is not a Baha’i, about the correlation between the Baha’i Teachings and recent developments in the physical sciences:

 

In our times we can only survive, and our civilisation can only flower, if we reorient the conventional wisdom and achieve the new insights which have been proclaimed by the Baha’i Faith and which are now also supported by the latest discoveries of the empirical sci­ences.

 

Baha’is proclaim that the most important con­dition that can bring about peace is unity - the unity of families, of nations, and of the great currents of thought and inquiry that we denote science and religion.  Maturity, in turn, is a prerequisite for such unity.  This is evolution­ary thinking, and its validity is shown by the new theories which emerge from nonequilibrium thermodynamics, dynamical systems theory, cybernetics, and the related sciences of complexity.  They are supported by detailed empirical investigations in such fields as physical cosmology, palaeobiological macroevolutionary theory, and new trends in historiography.

 

            The House of Justice wishes to avoid use of the terms "Baha’i scholarship" and "Baha’i schol­ars” in an exclusive sense, which would effec­tively establish a demarcation between those ad­mitted into this category and those denied en­trance to it.  It is clear that such terms are relative, and that what is a worthy scholarly endeavour by a Baha’i when compared to the activities of those with whom he is in contact, may well be regarded as of vastly lesser significance when measured against the accomplishments of the outstanding scholars which the Faith has produced.  The House of Justice seeks the creation of a Baha’i commu­nity in which the members encourage each other, where there is respect for accomplishment, and a common realization that every one is, in his or her own way, seeking to acquire a deeper understand­ing of the Revelation of Baha’u’llah and to con­tribute to the advancement of the Faith,

 

[5]        19 May 1995

 

            The opportunity which electronic communica­tion technology provides for more speedy and thorough consultation among the friends is highly significant.  Without doubt, it represents another manifestation of a development ea­gerly anticipated by the Guardian when he foresaw the creation of "a mechanism of world intercommunication ... embracing the whole planet, freed from national hindrances and re­strictions, and functioning with marvellous swiftness and perfect regularity".

 

            As you well appreciate, the extent to which such technology advances the work of the Faith depends, of course, on the manner in which it is used.  As a medium for Baha’is to exchange views, it imposes on participants the same requirements of moderation, candour, and courtesy as would be the case in any other discussion.  Likewise, those involved should avoid belittling the views of one another.  In this regard, the House of Justice has noted your understandable repugnance at an ap­parent temptation to use misleading and invidious labels like "traditionalists" and "liberals", which divide the Baha’i community.  To the extent that this divisive habit of mind may persist in the Baha’i community, it is obviously a carry-over from non-Baha’i society and a manifestation of an immature conception of life.  If Baha’is were to persist in this mode of thinking, It would bring to naught even the most worthwhile intellectual en­deavour, as has so conspicuously been the case with societies of the past.

 

            Most important of all, as with any exploration by Baha’is of the beliefs and practices of their Faith electronic discussion will serve the inter­ests of the Cause and its members only as it is conducted within the framework of the Baha’i Teachings and the truths they enshrine.  To at­tempt to discuss the Cause of God apart from or with disdain for the authoritative guidance inher­ent in these Teachings would clearly be a logical contradiction.  To take the first point mentioned in your letter, it is obvious that seeking to impose limits on the universality of the authority of God's Manifestation would lead to the frustration of serious scholarly work and generate disharmony within an effort whose success depends precisely upon a spirit of unity and mutual trust.  The stand­ard is the one made clear by Baha’u’llah Himself.

 

The essence of belief in Divine unity consisteth in regarding Him Who is the Manifestation of God and Him Who is the invisible, the inacces­sible, the unknowable Essence as one and the same.  By this is meant that whatsoever pertaineth to the former, all His acts and doings, whatever He ordaineth or forbiddeth, should be considered, in all their aspects, and under all circumstances, and without any reservation, as identical with the Will of God Himself

 

            With regard to the harmony of science and religion, the Writings of the Central Figures and the commentaries of the Guardian make abun­dantly clear that the task of humanity, including the Baha’i community that serves as the "leaven" within it, is to create a global civilization which embodies both the spiritual and material dimen­sions of existence.  The nature and scope of such a civilisation are still beyond anything the present generation can conceive.  The prosecution of this vast enterprise will depend on a progressive inter­action between the truths and principles of religion and the discoveries and insights of scientific inquiry.  This entails living with ambiguities as a natural and inescapable feature of the process of exploring reality.  It also requires us not to limit science to any particular school of thought or methodological approach postulated in the course of its development.  The challenge facing Baha’i thinkers is to provide responsible leadership in this endeavour, since it is they who have both the priceless insights of the Revelation and the advan­tages conferred by scientific investigation.

 

            The case and relative impersonality of the electronic medium require in some ways an even higher level of self-discipline than is the case in situations where a spirit of unity is reinforced by the opportunity for direct personal contact and social interaction.  In the pursuit of such a spirit of unity, Baha’is will, without doubt, wish to assist the consultative processes by sharing and discuss­ing relevant Baha’i texts.  This will itself have the further effect of drawing attention back to the framework of Baha’i belief

 

[6]        14 March 1996

 

            You express disquiet that attempts being made to introduce a distinction between "Baha’i lay­men" and "Baha’i scholars" with respect to the study of the Faith tend to generate a spirit of disunity among the friends.  Your concern is fully justified.  Such an approach to the study of the Cause would betray a fundamental misun­derstanding of the pattern of Baha’i society as set out in the Teachings of the Faith.

 

            As you know, Baha’u’llah says that the pur­suit of knowledge has been enjoined upon every­one, and knowledge itself is described by Him as wings to man's life" and "a ladder for his ascent".  Those whose high attainments in this respect make it possible for them to contribute in impor­tant ways to the advancement of civilization are deserving of society's recognition and gratitude.

 

            In the study of the Revelation of God, an individual's proficiency in one of the physical or social sciences, in law, philology, or other fields of specialization will often throw valuable light on issues being examined, and such contributions are greatly to be appreciated.  The field of Near East studies, mentioned in your letter, is one that can assist in this way.  However, no one speciali­zation wrong the many branches of scholarly research can confer upon its practitioners an au­thoritative role in the common effort of exploring the implications of so staggering and all-encom­passing a body of truth.

 

            Collateral with His summons to the pursuit of knowledge, Baha’u’llah has abolished entirely that feature of all past religions by which aspecial caste of persons such as the Christian priesthood or the Islamic ‘ulama came to exercise authority over the religious understanding and practice of their fellow believers.  In a letter written in Persian on his behalf to the Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of Istanbul, the Guardian is at some pains to underline the importance of this marked depar­ture from past religious history:

 

But praise be to God that the Pen of Glory has done away with the unyielding and dictatorial views of the learned and the wise, dismissed the assertions of individuals as an authoritative criterion, even though they were recognized as the most accomplished and learned among men, and ordained that all matters be referred to authorized centres and specified assemblies.

 

            The Baha’i Dispensation is described in the words of its Founder as "a day that shall not be followed by night", Through His Covenant, Baha’u’llah has provided an unfailing source of divine guidance that will endure throughout the Dispensation.  Authority to administer the affairs of the community and to ensure both the integrity of the Word of God and the promotion of the Faith's message is conferred upon the Administrative Order to which the Covenant has given birth.  It Is solely by the process of free election or by unsought appointment that the members of the institutions of this Order are assigned to their positions in it.  There is no profession in either the teaching of the Faith or its administration for which one can train or to which a believer can properly aspire.  Cautionary words of Baha’u’llah are particularly relevant:

 

Ever since the seeking of preference and dis­tinction came into play, the world has been laid waste.  It has become desolate....

Indeed, man is noble, inasmuch as each one is a repository of the sign of God.  Nevertheless, to regard oneself as superior in knowledge, learn­ing or virtue, or to exalt oneself or seek prefer­ence is a grievous transgression,

 

            The promotion of learning of every kind among the Faith’s members is an activity fundamental to the achievement of the community's wide-rang­ing goals.  Consequently, the encouragement of individual believers to acquire knowledge, the operation of Baha’i schools, universities, and train­ing institutes, the organization of study groups, and the work of task forces dedicated to relating the principles of the Revelation to the challenges facing humankind all represent activities with which both the Counsellors and their auxiliaries, on the one hand, and National and Local Spiritual Assemblies, on the other, must concern them­selves.  In shouldering these demanding responsi­bilities, Baha’i institutions everywhere find their efforts greatly enhanced by the assistance of be­lievers whose intellectual pursuits, qualities of character, and devotion to the Cause particularly fit them to contribute their services.

 

            A special responsibility in the matter rests on the Counsellors because of the duty assigned to them to assist in releasing the potential of the individual believer.  The members of this institu­tion, appointed for specific terms, have been given the task of carrying forward into the future the functions of the protection and propagation of the Faith conferred in the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Baha on the Hands of the Cause.  Thus, the Counsellors are called on to "diffuse the Di­vine Fragrances, to edify the souls of men, to promote learning, to improve the character of all men and to be, at all times and under all condi­tions, sanctified and detached from earthly things..." Like the Hands, the Counsellors have no interpre­tive authority, an authority conferred by the Cov­enant only on 'Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian of the Faith.  While some Counsellors, like some of the Hands, will have pursued various academic or professional disciplines in their individual ca­reers, their discharge of their duties is not depend­ent on proficiencies of this kind.  All of them share fully in the vital task of encouraging believers everywhere in the acquisition of knowledge, in all its dimensions . All share, too, in the responsibility assigned to the institution of which they are mem­bers to protect the Faith against its enemies, both external and internal, a concern to which both the Master and the Guardian attached pre-eminent importance.

 

[7]        2 July 1996

 

            The purpose of this letter is not to enter into a detailed examination of the activities and state­ments of the friends to whom you refer, or to discuss the responses they have received over the years from institutions of the Faith.  Rather, the House of Justice wishes to relate this situ­ation to certain aspects of Baha’i belief, in the hope that thereby it may enable vou to find answers to some of the questions which preoc­cupy your mind.

 

            At the very core of the aims of the Faith-, are the establishment of justice and unity in the world, the removal of prejudice and enmity from among all people, the awakening of compassion and under­standing in the hearts of all men and women, and the raising of all souls to a new level of spirituality and behaviour through the vitalizing influence of divine Revelation.  The course set forth by Baha’u’llah for the attainment of these aims is the double task of simultaneously building an ideal society and perfecting the behaviour of individuals.  For this dual and reciprocal transformation He has not only revealed laws, principles and truths at­tuned to the needs of this age, but has established the very nucleus and pattern of those institutions which are to evolve into the structure of the divinely purposed world society.

 

Central to your perception of the statements made by the believers about whom you are concerned are their assertions that they are entirely obedient to the spirit of the Covenant and the institutions of the Faith; that they are merely voicing their disagreement with certain decisions and policies made by these institutions; are pro­testing against what they perceive to be unjust or improper actions by some people who occupy prominent administrative positions; and are sug­gesting modifications to Baha’i procedures to prevent such perceived abuses of authority.  These assertions, however, overlook certain important Baha’i principles which provide the methods and channels for the voicing of such grievances or disagreements, and which are designed to lead to resolution of problems while preserving the unity of the community.

 

            Over many years, a few believers in the United States, 'instead of confirming their protests against what they saw as abuses of authority by Baha’i bodies to the channels and agencies which are plentifully provided for such a purpose, have been publicly and privily assailing the institutions of the Cause and generalizing specific accusations of injustice to such an extent as to accuse the entire system of corruption, not only in practice but also in form and theory.  One outcome of this continu­ing stream of negative criticism has been the gradual conversion of unverified accusations into accepted "facts" in the minds of some of their hearers.

 

            Through such activities, and the mutual sup­port that they give to one another, these friends have increasingly assumed the appearance of a dissident group of Baha’is who are attempting to arouse widespread disaffection in the community and thereby to bring about changes in the structure and principles of Baha’i administration, making it accord more closely with their personal notions.  Such an activity is closely analogous to the pursuit of a partisan political program, an activity which is accepted and even admired in most societies, but is entirely antithetical to the spirit of the Baha’i Faith.  It promotes an atmosphere of con­tention, and Baha’u’llah has expressly stated: "Conflict and contention are categorically forbid­den in His Book."

 

            The laws, commandments, injunctions and exhortations we have all agreed to obey and fol­low as Baha’is include a clearly defined approach to decision-making and to the implementation of decisions.  You are, undoubtedly, well familiar with the various aspects of this approach, which is built on the conviction that the path of unity is the only path that can lead to the civilization envi­sioned by Baha’u’llah.  So strong is the emphasis on unity that, for example, once a decision has been made by an Assembly, everyone is expected to support that decision wholeheartedly, relying confidently on 'Abdu'l-Baha's assurance that,

if the decision is wrong, "as it is in unity the truth will be revealed and the wrong made right".  This principle of unity is supplemented by other, related guidelines covering such issues as how criticism can be expressed, how the wrongdoing of members of the community is to be corrected, how the principle of justice is to be applied and appeals admitted, and how the integrity of indi­viduals, the institutions and the Cause is to be upheld.

 

            In adhering to such teachings Baha’is recog­nize that 'individuals do not become wholly virtu­ous on accepting the Faith.  It takes time for them to grow spiritually out of their personal imperfec­tions and out of the structural and behavioural assumptions of the societies in which they have been raised, which calor their view of the world.  The institutions of the Cause, which the believers have been raising in obedience to the law of Baha’u’llah, in accordance with the pattern set forth by 'Abdu'l-Baha and the expositions of Shoghi Effendi, and under the guidance of the Universal House of Justice, are still in their embryonic stage and not infrequently fall short of the ideal for which they are striving.  There is also the possibility of certain individuals misusing the positions of authority, to which they are elected or appointed within the structure of the Administra­tive Order.  Again and again Shoghi Effendi, in his letters, called upon the Baha’is to be patient and forbearing, both with one another and with their Assemblies, but in serious cases of malfunction­ing by either institutions or individuals, neither the Guardian nor the Universal House of Justice has hesitated to take remedial action.  Baha’i Ad­ministration has provisions to cope with such human frailties and is designed to enable the believers to build Baha’u’llah's new World Order in the midst of their imperfections, but without conflicts which would destroy the entire edifice.

 

            One of the tasks of the Universal House of Justice, in addition to enacting legislation, resolv­ing difficult problems, elucidating obscure mat­ters, settling differences, administering the worldwide affairs of the Cause and directing the course of the implementation of the Divine Plan, is to protect the individual believers and the body of the Cause from the deleterious effects of malfunc­tioning institutions and unwise or malicious indi­viduals . Most of the time these defects, whether in the behaviour of 'individuals or 'institutions, are of a relatively minor nature and can be dealt with by the Local and National Assemblies or by the Counsellors with the members of the Auxiliary Boards and their assistants.  However, at times the situation becomes far more grave and the World Centre is compelled to intervene.

 

            You are most directly concerned with the situation in the United States.  The letter of 19 May 1994 does, indeed, address certain aspects of the functioning of your National Spiritual Assembly - it was, after all, written in response to the National Assembly's request for guidance - but that is merely one of the issues before the Ameri­can Baha’i community.  If you study that letter carefully you will see that it calls for a range of improvements in the actions of the individual believers and the entire community.  Indeed it develops points touched on in the letter of 29 December 1988 which urges the believers to re­think accepted theories of the functioning of soci­ety.

 

            Sadly, efforts made by the 'institutions and some of their fellow believers to explain these issues seem to have been dismissed by the friends previously referred to.  A few politely acknowl­edged the communications of the House of Jus­tice, but then continued on their way, ignoring the fundamental points which had been made.  A few have openly opposed the House of Justice's guid­ance.  The rhetoric has become far removed from a pure concern to uphold justice and the rights of individuals within the community; it has devel­oped into the fomentation of contention about some of the most fundamental beliefs of the Faith and an attack on the basis of the Covenant which, alone, is the ultimate guarantee that the Faith will remain true to its divine origin throughout the centuries.

 

            The point at issue has thus become that of whether believers should be permitted to continue indefinitely to undermine the faith of their fellow Baha’is, stir up agitation within the community, and publicly assail the theory as well as the prac­tice of Baha’u’llah's Administrative Order.

 

            In the Kitab-I-Aqdas Baha’u’llah states: "We approve of liberty 'in certain circumstances, and refuse to sanction it 'in others." One area in which liberty is limited in the Baha’i community is that governing methods and channels for the expres­sion of criticism.  In this connection, we enclose a brief compilation of excerpts from letters written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to individual believ­ers. [The compilation referred to is not provided here because the indented paragraphs which follow give the essential passages conveying the advice of the beloved Guardian.]  From this guidance, the following principles can be clearly derived:

 

The importance of unity as both the goal of Baha’u’llah's Message and the means for its establishment, Baha’u’llah "has not only advo­cated certain principles, but has also provided a mechanism whereby that ideal can be estab­lished and perpetuated", adherence to both of which by the friends is essential for "the reali­zation of His goal of world unity".

 

Baha’is are "fully entitled to address criticisms to their Assemblies" and offer their recommen­dations.  When Baha’is have addressed their criticisms, suggestions and advice to their Assemblies, including their views "about policies or individual members of elected bodies", they must "wholeheartedly accept the advice or decision of the Assembly".

There is a clear distinction between, on the one hand, the prohibition of backbiting, which would include adverse comments about individuals or institutions made to other individuals privately or publicly, and, on the other hand, the encour­agement to unburden oneself of one's concerns to a Spiritual Assembly, Local or National (or now, also, to confide in a Counsellor or Auxil­iary Board member).  Thus, although one of the principal functions of the nineteen Day Feast is to provide a forum for "open and constructive criticism and deliberation regarding the state of affairs within the local Baha’i community", complaints about the actions of an individual member of an Assembly should be made di­rectly and confidentially to the Assembly itself, not made to other individuals or even raised at a Nineteen Day Feast.

 

While constructive criticism is encouraged, destructive criticism, such as the pattern of “continually challenging and criticizing the decisions” of the Assemblies, prevents the rapid growth of the Faith and repels those who are yet outside the community.  Indeed "all criticisms and discussions of a negative character which may result in undermining the authority of the Assembly as a body should be strictly avoided.  For otherwise the order of the Cause itself will be endangered, and confusion and discord will reign in the community.” "Vicious criticism is indeed a calamity", the root of which is "lack of faith in the system of Baha’u’llah" and failure to follow the "Baha’i laws in voting, in elect­ing, in serving, and in abiding by Assembly decisions".

 

            The questions of how criticism is expressed and acted upon in the Baha’i community, and how the Spiritual Assemblies administer justice in regard to individual believers, are but elements of far greater concepts and should become second nature in the social discourse of Baha'is.  The Baha’i community is an association of individuals who have voluntarily come together, on recogniz­ing Baha'u'llah's claim to be the Manifestation of God for this age, to establish certain patterns of personal and social behaviour and to build the institutions that are to promote these patterns.  There are numerous individuals who share the ideals of the Faith and draw inspiration from its Teachings, while disagreeing with certain of its features, but those who actually enter the Baha’i community have accepted, by their own free will, to follow the Teachings in their entirety, under­standing that, if doubts and disagreements arise in the process of translating the Teachings into prac­tice, the final arbiter is, by the explicit authority of the Revealed Text, the Universal House of Jus­tice.

 

            It is the ardent prayer of the Universal House of Justice that any friends who find themselves at odds in this endeavour will have confidence in the guidance it provides for them, will renew their study of the Teachings and, for the sake of Baha’u’llah, strengthen their love for one another.  As the beloved Guardian's secretary wrote on his behalf to an individual believer on 25 October 1949: "Without the spirit of real love for Baha’u’llah, for His Faith and its Institutions, and the believers for each other, the Cause can never really bring in large numbers of people.  For it is not preaching and rules the world wants, but love and action."  The worldwide undertakings on which the Cause of God is embarked are far too signifi­cant, the need of the peoples of the world for the Message of Baha’u’llah far too urgent, the perils facing mankind far too grave, the progress of events far too swift, to permit His followers to squander their time and efforts in fruitless conten­tion.  Now, if ever, is the time for love among the friends, for unity of understanding and endeavour, for self-sacrifice and service by Baha’is in every part of the world.

 

            The House of Justice understands and appre­ciates your concern for the proper functioning of the Baha’i community.  It urges you to contem­plate the issues you have raised in the light of the Teachings themselves, and not to weigh them with the standards of other philosophies or of any civil system, the fundamental assumptions of which differ in many respects from those of Baha’u’llah's divinely conceived Order.

[8]        3 June 1997

 

The questions you pose, arising out of an email conversation between yourself and one of the other contributors to the discussion group in which you participate, are of fundamental im­portance, and the House of Justice warmly appreciates the spirit of your enquiry.

 

            The issues raised seem to resolve themselves into two points: the first being whether or not the Universal House of Justice has the authority to make authoritative interpretations; the second is whether anyone has the right to challenge the authority or actions of the Universal House of Justice.  When these issues are approached with an understanding of the unity underlying all the Teach­ings, clarification results.  Should the seeker, how­ever, be influenced by a spirit of mistrust and conflict, then unending problems appear.

 

            The above points have both been covered in three letters written by the Universal House of Justice on 9 March 1965, 27 May 1966 and 7 December 1969.  Unfortunately it seems that many of the friends have not studied these letters deeply or understood their implications.  Already in The Dispensation of Baha’u’llah Shoghi Effendi has shown, beyond any doubt, that the function of making authoritative interpretations of the Teach­ings is confined solely and exclusively to the Guardian.  Neither the Universal House of Justice, nor any other institution, person or group of per­sons can assume that function.  That the Universal House of Justice will never infringe on the func­tions reserved to the Guardian is shown, not only by its own words and actions, but by Shoghi Effendi's statement in that same document: "Nei­ther can, nor will ever, infringe upon the sacred and prescribed domain of the other.  " It is guaran­teed by the fact that the Universal House of Justice as well as the Guardian are both "under the care and protection of the Abha Beauty, under the shelter and unerring guidance of His Holiness, the Exalted One".

 

            In its letter of 9 March 1965, the House of Justice has stated: "There is a profound difference between the interpretations of the Guardian and the elucidations of the House of Justice in exercise of its function to deliberate upon all problems which have caused difference, questions that are obscure, and matters that are not expressly re­corded in the Book." The friends will come to understand what this difference is by observing how the House of Justice functions and by turning to it for explanations when necessary.

 

            As you recognize, the authority of the Univer­sal House of Justice is unchallengeable.  This is stated in numerous places 'in the Writings.  In the same passage of the Will and Testament quoted above, 'Abdu'l-Baha goes on to say of the Guard­ian and the Universal House of Justice: "'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 disbelleveth 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."

 

            Furthermore, at the very end of the Will and Testament, in warning against the danger of Cov­enant-breaking,'Abdu'l-Baha wrote: "Beware lest anyone falsely interpret these words, and like unto them that have broken the Covenant after the Day of Ascension (of  Baha’u’llah) advance a pretext, raise the standard of  revolt, wax stubborn, and open wide the door of false interpretation." In this context, He continues: "To none is given the right to put forth his own opinion or express his particu­lar conviction.  All must seek guidance and turn unto the Centre of the Cause and the House of Justice.  And he that tumeth unto whatsoever else is indeed in grievous error.

            It is natural that the friends would discuss such matters among themselves, as you and your correspondent have been doing on your Internet discussion group; how otherwise are they to deepen their understanding of the Teachings? But they should recognize that the resolution of differences of opinion on such fundamental questions i not to be found by continued discussion, but in referring to the Universal House of Justice itself, as you have done, Prolonged, unresolved, public discus­sion of these fundamental questions can do noth­ing but breed confusion and dissension.

 

            Some people have put forward the thesis that in place of the Guardian's function of authorita­tive interpretation, a check on the Universal House of Justice should be set up, either in the form of the general opinion of the mass of the believers, or in the form of a body of learned Bahd'is - prefer­ably those with academic qualifications.  The former is in direct contradiction to the Guardian's statement that the members of the Universal House of Justice are not "allowed to be governed by the feelings, the general opinion, and even the convic­tions of the mass of the faithful, or of those who directly elect them." "they, are to follow", he writes, "the dictates and promptings of their con­science.  They may, indeed they must, acquaint themselves with the conditions prevailing among the community, must weigh dispassionately in their minds the merits of any case presented for their consideration, but must reserve for them­selves the right of an unfettered decision.  God will verily inspire them with whatsoever He willeth, is Baha’u’llah's incontrovertible assurance." As to the latter alternative: this would constitute usur­pation of a function of the Guardian.

 

            Scholarship has a high rank in the Cause of God, and the Universal House of Justice continu­ally consults the views of scholars and experts in the course of its work.  However, as you appreci­ate, scholars and experts have no authority over the Institutions of the Cause.  In a letter written on behalf of the Guardian, on 14 March 1927, to the Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Istanbul, it is pointed out how, in the past, it was certain indi­viduals who "accounted themselves as superior in knowledge and elevated in position" who caused division, and that it was those "who pretended to be the most distinguished of all" who "always proved themselves to be the source of conten­tion." "But praise be to God" he continued, "that the Pen of Glory has done away with the unyield­ing and dictatorial views of the learned and the wise, dismissed the assertions of individuals as an authoritative criterion, even though they were recognized as the most accomplished and learned among men and ordained that all matters be re­ferred to authorized centres and specified assem­blies.  Even so, no assembly has been invested with the absolute authority to deal with such general matters as affect the interests of nations.  Nay, rather, He has brought all the assemblies together under the shadow of the one House of Justice, one divinely-appointed Centre, so that there would be only one Centre and all the rest integrated into a single body, revolving around one expressly-des­ignated Pivot, thus making them all proof against schism and division."

 

            Comments have been made in recent times, implying the existence of two categories of be­lievers, designated '-administrators" and "academ­ics ". The House of Justice feels that it is important to recognize the unsoundness of such a concept.  In the nature of Baha’i administration, there is no class of believers who serve as "administrators". Individual Bahd'is are either elected or appointed to positions of administrative service; they come from every field of endeavour, including academia.  There is, moreover, a natural flow of individuals into and out of administrative posts.  The same applies to the occupants of those institutions of the Administrative Order which are referred to as being of the "learned" in the Faith.  Clearly there are some Baha'is who are "academics" and some who are not, but "academics" in no way constitute a recognized group in relation to the structure of the Cause.

 

            There remains the question concerning the authority for the duties and responsibilities out­lined for the Universal House of Justice in its constitution.  These provisions are a codification of explicit statements found in the sacred texts and the writings of Shoghi Effendi.

 

            The House of Justice assures you of its prayers in the Holy Shrines that your efforts to assist the friends to overcome misunderstandings and to clarify their vision of the Faith will be blessed with divine confirmations.