Pilgrims' Notes vs Baha'i Writings

[Number Eleven - GPEMC!]

Hi Susan.
"You, however, are not in the position to decide what is or is not part of
the Baha'i Writings."
If I can't, who can?
--Kent
[Mod: Obviously the Universal House of Justice has that authority. Tom]

Yes, but everyone has the authority to find out for themselves and inasmuch
make their own individual determination.

There are systemic approaches that are quite reliable. Determining
philosophical integrity of the entire body of work attributed to an author;
from studies of comparative structure, style, symbolic application, maxim
deference, and developmental patterns observed across the author's works in
historical order, can go a long way to establishing which of the attributed
works are authentic and which are not - without the need to defer to other
opinions and claims.

The Aqdas is quite distinct from all other works attributed to Baha'u'llah,
even if it is taken as a parody of "divinely" immutable law. For example,
according to the covenant, the purpose of religion [and hence the *first*
duty of every subject entity] is the promulgation of love and unity (TB220,
cf. PHW3 & "The Ninth Ishraq"), yet we find an apparently conflicting maxim
(IE most important proposition) in the opening statement of the Aqdas. While
it can be argued that in literature after the Hermetic style, the maxims of
documents lower in the hierarchy are defined by maxims in documents higher
in the hierarchy (and not vice versa), the symbolic language changes from a
predominantly object based style of symbolism in the rest of the writings to
a predominantly context based style of symbolism in the Aqdas where direct
recursive inferences make their only appearance. Eg. Section 5 describes the
Aqdas as a "choice wine" and by implication a substance that apparently is
taken to dull the mind (see the Aqdas notes 143 & 170) and whose consumption
is therein forbidden (cf. Kitab-i-Aqdas Sections 5, 119, & 155). Outside the
context of alcohol proscription, the adjective in the phrase, "choice wine",
prescribes obligatory moderation of consumption as it applies; inferring
that despite the title, the meaning of the work is strictly subject to
externally defined context(s) presumably documented by the same author. The
"Principles of the Baha'i Faith" be they Abdul-Baha's 4, 9, 11, or 13
principles, or Mason Remey's 12 Principles (from when Abdul-Baha was still
living) are found explicitly stated in material throughout all of
Baha'u'llah's Writings except for the Kitab-i-Aqdas where references if any,
are mostly implicit and may even seem contradictory (eg. Aqdas Sections, 1,
2, 7, 17, 29, 37, 41, & 45, 52, etc.). This makes for a very interesting
investigation and there is plenty of base-line material against which to
compare the implications of specific types of variation.

Comparing largely unverified oral notes (eg. Paris Talks, Promulgation of
Universal Peace), reviewed compositions (Eg. Some Answered Questions), and
actual writings (A Traveller's Narrative) is quite an exposé on what changes
and what doesn't depending on how far the literature actually originates
from it's attributed source.

In any case, the independent investigation of truth belongs to the
individual and is ongoing, as are all fields of learning...

[Kent Johnson]

Hi Timothy,

Thanks for writing back. I have several problems with saying that the
Universal House of Justice can or should proclaim what are the "Baha'i
Writings".

Also that Promulgation of Universal Peace and Paris Talk, translated talks,
are "pilgrims' notes" which has a specific meaning to Baha'is. In my
opinion, that "many" of the talks in those two books are
"unauthenticated"does not make the books "pilgrims' notes". And unless the
Universal House of Justice wants to publish a dictionary, those books and
even pilgrims' notes are "Baha'i Writings" according to common usage of the
words.

Post by Number Eleven - GPEMC!
In any case, the independent investigation of truth belongs to the
individual and is ongoing, as are all fields of learning...

That is a major point that seems missing in most Baha'i discussion to which
I am party. Mostly Baha'is seem to want an authoritative answer.

The most authoritative answer I have found is that we must arise to make our
lives admirable according to the principles of all religion.

--Kent

Post by Number Eleven - GPEMC!

Hi Susan.
"You, however, are not in the position to decide what is or is not part of
the Baha'i Writings."
If I can't, who can?
--Kent
[Mod: Obviously the Universal House of Justice has that authority. Tom]

Yes, but everyone has the authority to find out for themselves and inasmuch
make their own individual determination.
There are systemic approaches that are quite reliable. Determining
philosophical integrity of the entire body of work attributed to an author;
from studies of comparative structure, style, symbolic application, maxim
deference, and developmental patterns observed across the author's works in
historical order, can go a long way to establishing which of the attributed
works are authentic and which are not - without the need to defer to other
opinions and claims.
The Aqdas is quite distinct from all other works attributed to
Baha'u'llah,
even if it is taken as a parody of "divinely" immutable law. For example,
according to the covenant, the purpose of religion [and hence the *first*
duty of every subject entity] is the promulgation of love and unity (TB220,
cf. PHW3 & "The Ninth Ishraq"), yet we find an apparently conflicting maxim
(IE most important proposition) in the opening statement of the Aqdas. While
it can be argued that in literature after the Hermetic style, the maxims of
documents lower in the hierarchy are defined by maxims in documents higher
in the hierarchy (and not vice versa), the symbolic language changes from a
predominantly object based style of symbolism in the rest of the writings to
a predominantly context based style of symbolism in the Aqdas where direct
recursive inferences make their only appearance. Eg. Section 5 describes the
Aqdas as a "choice wine" and by implication a substance that apparently is
taken to dull the mind (see the Aqdas notes 143 & 170) and whose consumption
is therein forbidden (cf. Kitab-i-Aqdas Sections 5, 119, & 155). Outside the
context of alcohol proscription, the adjective in the phrase, "choice wine",
prescribes obligatory moderation of consumption as it applies; inferring
that despite the title, the meaning of the work is strictly subject to
externally defined context(s) presumably documented by the same author. The
"Principles of the Baha'i Faith" be they Abdul-Baha's 4, 9, 11, or 13
principles, or Mason Remey's 12 Principles (from when Abdul-Baha was still
living) are found explicitly stated in material throughout all of
Baha'u'llah's Writings except for the Kitab-i-Aqdas where references if any,
are mostly implicit and may even seem contradictory (eg. Aqdas Sections, 1,
2, 7, 17, 29, 37, 41, & 45, 52, etc.). This makes for a very interesting
investigation and there is plenty of base-line material against which to
compare the implications of specific types of variation.
Comparing largely unverified oral notes (eg. Paris Talks, Promulgation of
Universal Peace), reviewed compositions (Eg. Some Answered Questions), and
actual writings (A Traveller's Narrative) is quite an exposé on what changes
and what doesn't depending on how far the literature actually originates
from it's attributed source.
In any case, the independent investigation of truth belongs to the
individual and is ongoing, as are all fields of learning...
--
Timothy Casey GPEMC! Conditions apply. See www.fieldcraft.biz/GPEMC
Essays: http://timothycasey.info; http://speed-reading-comprehension.com
Software: http://fieldcraft.biz; Scientific IQ Test, Web Menus, Security.
Science & Technical: http://geologist-1011.com; http://web-design-1011.com

[Number Eleven - GPEMC!]

Post by Kent Johnson
Hi Timothy,
Thanks for writing back. I have several problems with saying that the
Universal House of Justice can or should proclaim what are the "Baha'i
Writings".

I think I can understand the problem because the existence of methods of
arriving at the truth independently of the Universal House of Justice, makes
any claim to exclusive authority on the matter deceptive in much the same
way as the claim to sole authority would in arithmetic. These are things
people can figure out for themselves, if they are interested, and thus all
authority is limited to conforming to such facts as they've no ability to
change, lest such authorities become despotic and spiritually seditious in
the cause to force their subjects to perpetrate an offence to conscience
such as fraud.

Post by Kent Johnson
Also that Promulgation of Universal Peace and Paris Talk, translated talks,
are "pilgrims' notes" which has a specific meaning to Baha'is. In my
opinion, that "many" of the talks in those two books are
"unauthenticated"does not make the books "pilgrims' notes". And unless the
Universal House of Justice wants to publish a dictionary, those books and
even pilgrims' notes are "Baha'i Writings" according to common usage of the
words.

Some statements of the unauthenticated notes are correct. We know this from
the existence of independently corroborating sources and in some cases
congruent quotes in `Abdu'l-Baha's own writings. `Abdu'l-Baha did come to
recognise the individuality of faith for example because of what we read in
his own hand from "A Traveller's Narrative" (90-92) on the subject of
freedom of conscience. IE:
http://fieldcraft.biz/topics/bahai/freedom-of-conscience-in-the-bahai-writings/index.shtml

And this stands somewhat in contrast to some ideas attributed to
`Abdu'l-Baha - so we know that not everything people attribute to
`Abdu'l-Baha was actually stated by him.

Post by Kent Johnson

Post by Number Eleven - GPEMC!
In any case, the independent investigation of truth belongs to the
individual and is ongoing, as are all fields of learning...

That is a major point that seems missing in most Baha'i discussion to which
I am party. Mostly Baha'is seem to want an authoritative answer.

This desire for intellectual arbitration comes from the vocalisation of
elements in the community who rather than promote unity, seek to repress
diversity. It is part of the journey to fascism (or in the case of religion;
fundamentalism) along the road that gets travelled when anything is
proclaimed a "cause". The IPCC is not a peer reviewed society but an
intellectual arbiter - this function is why the opinions expressed by the
IPCC are contradicted by good, solid, diligent, scientific research - see
http://climate.geologist-1011.net for more detail on a modern secular
example of how intellectual fascism born of the desire for intellectual
arbitration completely corrupts the process of independent search for truth.

Post by Kent Johnson
The most authoritative answer I have found is that we must arise to make our
lives admirable according to the principles of all religion.

I could not agree more. Moreover, when we look more closely at the
principles we find shared by all religions, we also find a single almost
universally shared maxim (most important proposition) defining the Rose Line
to which the symbol of the "Rose of Love" (IE compass of compassion) invoked
in the third of the Persian Hidden Words alludes.

I've started writing some material on my beliefs that is more relevant to my
own experience and this Rose Line is something of significance because it
not only defines the medium (cognitive empathy) by which God (IE love)
speaks and reveals directly to *all* human beings, but also forms the common
line connecting all religion. For the specifics, see:
http://literature.timothycasey.info

I think the most important thing is to remain true to your own integrity.
You are every bit as capable as Baha'u'llah of second-guessing the emotional
response of others to your behaviour. This sense of empathy or conscience is
not the exclusive purview of the "Manifestation of God" and I do not believe
that it is something that can be said to lead any person astray - because to
do so is in my view, to deny the rationality of human experience itself.

But these are just my thoughts based on my own experience and subsequent
beliefs. I think it is up to you to embrace your individual beliefs as the
inimitable product of your unique experience because they are just as
important, as sacred, as my own and anyone else's beliefs and source
experience...