‘Should the Baha’i model of leadership be the best that is in the wider community + the ‘X’ factor ?
I have updated something I wrote some years ago in the belief that it might be useful to some people;
Serving each other’s success in team-work
The ‘Ethics of Leadership’ – through serving Universal Participation
a ‘1-page’ Development Programme for LSAs & other Baha’i Institutions – to release the power for success
There are two Baha’i sources for guiding principles in this ‘one-page’ programme:-
i) The principles of Universal Participation, transformation & effective planning – called for by The Universal House of Justice
ii) The principle enshrined in this statement by the Guardian on leadership;
“The first quality of leadership both among individuals & assemblies is the capacity to use the energy & competence that exists in the rank and file of its followers. Otherwise the more competent members of the group will go at a tangent & try to find elsewhere a field of work & where they could use their energy.”
Groups and individuals help each other in striving toward maturity. We might therefore also add this interesting statement by Carl Rogers in his book On Becoming a Person:
“The degree to which I can create relationships which facilitate the growth of others is a measure of the growth I have achieved myself.”
Surely this = THE central ethic for relationships between individuals & within groups.
‘Do everything possible to create an environment in which those with whom you have relationship – from friends to humanity as a whole – have the best possible environment in which to become their best and fullest selves’.
Conversely do as little as possible that impedes the progress of others.
Leadership here then, for Baha’is and their institutions, is seen as stimulating, gathering & directing (gently) everyone’s energy and abilities – via creating & authorizing ways to participate.
This starts with listening, then asking, then encouraging then enabling.
This is closer to the loving parent image than the thou shalt/shall not’ aspect of a court of law.
The elements of this programme are, it is suggested, some of the characteristics of successful LSAs, NSAs etc.
The programme in outline contains 9 elements – each leads to the next & connects with others.
1 Be happy, confident & relaxed in working the divine system – and its Administration.
2 Lovingly consult with every woman, man, Youth & child in the community to see how s/he would like to serve. Most have dreams of ways to serve – help the dreams to become realities.
3 Realize the benefit of uniting around simple, broad policies early in each year’s work.
4 Use the broad policies to provide everyone with a simple job description – let them write first draft.
5 Trust & nurture the delegation of work, & diversity in ways of working. Avoid unnecessary interference in detail.
6 Maintain in consultation the distinction between policy matters and execution of policy. Consciously avoid having ‘an eye for the inessential’. Identify, empower & encourage ‘critical success factors’. (Keep your own ‘stuff’ off the table!)
7 See the work of the LSA as everyone’s successful action between meetings. Celebrate & further encourage small successes. Carry the news of successes to the Feast & the wider community. En-courage, en-courage, en-courage.
8 Use meetings to serve each soul so as to enable her/him to further achieve her/his goals of service.
9 Having used the first one or two meetings to create (or review) broad polices, terms of reference &/or job descriptions spend time on a) hearing & celebrating accounts of progress, b) giving encouragement & constructive evaluation & c) negotiating further support and empowerment for/with individuals.
Why ‘broad policies? Because individual initiative and creativity are vital to the achievement of tasks. Top down prescription kills the energy of individual initiative and creativity.
Serving the growth of others in friendships, in families, in businesses, in teaching , inorganizations and institutions = I suggest then is THE core ethic to achieve the success of desirable growth and development.
Roger Prentice Burnlaw Version 29 as at 29.08.09
-0-
What are the messages between the lines?
All communications from institutions should explicitly and implicitly carry messages such as these;
1 We are working together because of the mystical bond that unites us, and because of the gloriously high status Baha’u'llah gives to His believers – as in “Ye are the stars of the heaven of understanding, the breeze that stirreth at the break of day, the soft-flowing waters upon which must depend the very life of all men, the letters inscribed upon His sacred scroll. ” (Bahá’u'lláh: Gleanings Pages 196-197)
2 “We love you, we are encouraging you – we stand ready to serve your needs.”
3 “We have taken the trouble to understand how you are already serving Bahá’u'lláh and how you further want to serve Him – and dedicate ourselves to supporting you.”
4 “I am not able to participate in much teaching work but I dedicate myself to not undermining, negating and rubbishing the work of those who are able to teach.”
5 “Even though the ways you have chosen to serve Bahá’u'lláh may not be the ways that members of the LSA choose, or are able, to serve we value equally the work you are doing and will do all in our power to support it.”
6 “We who are not able to do very much will strive to eliminate negativity and get behind those who are able to be active.”
7 “We care about you as a person and as a servant of Bahá’u'lláh.”
-0-
Below is a typical diagram of a model showing styles of leadership.
Given our commitment to Science and Religion, as discovered truth and revealed truth respectively, the question arises,
‘Should the Baha’i model of leadership be the best that is in the wider community + the ‘X’ factor that is brought by Baha’u'llah’s Revelation (whatever that is determined to be)?’ ‘If this is not the case then what is?’
Photo & Diagram sources WikiPedia on ‘Climbing & on ‘Leadership’
I once asked on a course I was teaching this question, “What is the origin of human rights?” Very quickly a woman from Sweden said, “Human needs.” This struck a deep chord in me and I began to wonder how that might be the case and what were the implications for those of us that are interested in Baha’i-inspired development and education.
Recently I found this quotation included with Wendi Momen’s long list of human rights established within Baha’i writings. The most significant aspect of the quotation for me is the assertion that in governments, and in religions, autocratic governance actually prevents (presumably true and desirable ) development;
`Under an autocratic government the opinions of men are not free, and development is stifled, whereas in democracy, because thought and speech are not restricted, the greatest progress is witnessed. It is likewise true in the world of religion. When freedom of conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech prevail — that is to say, when every man according to his own idealization may give expression to his beliefs — development and growth are inevitable.’ Abdu’l-Bahá 1912
Thanks Wendi – your list and this quotation really go to the heart of the matter don’t they?
The free expression of opinions is not a ‘human right’ so much as a human and social necessity without which (true and desirable) progress is not possible. To achieve inevitable development and growth three conditions are necessary freedom of conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech. Pow!
As someone interested in education I can see the importance of these three, not least because elsewhere Abdu’l-Baha establishes discursive method, or dialogue (dia-logos) as desirable method over book-learning. Very simply Baha’i-inspired development and learning require the dialogic, and the dialogic requires freedom of conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech.
Why are these needs? To release effictively human potential both in relation to the individual, your son or daughter or pupils, but also for mankind collectively. The Revelation of Baha’u'llah is not His Writings it is I suggest human consciousness – slightly manifest, mainly still in the potential state. I dont say this just because of this;
There are certain pillars which have been established as the unshakable supports of the Faith of God. The mightiest of these is learning and the use of the mind, the expansion of consciousness, and insight into the realities of the universe and the hidden mysteries of Almighty God. To promote knowledge is thus an inescapable duty imposed on every one of the friends of God. SAB p. 126-7
But more because of this;
Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. Gl105
So the task is to release potential, from our selves and from others – that I suggest is ‘the Revelation’ It = +/- x right actions. By Revelation + – I mean the Revelation is human consciousness in two states 1) manifest and 2) potential. If not then, “Where is the Revelation of Baha’u'llah – in the ink on sheets of paper?” Right actions = those processes that we need to strengthern the transfer from the potential state to the manifest state. That = the new civilization. It seems continuous and multi-level dialogue supported by freedom of conscience, liberty of thought and right of speech are the keys.
Thank goodness we can demonstrate this as a way of ‘teaching’ the world. Nothing would undermine efforts more than rank hypocrisy.
This wonderful ‘tree of contemplative practices’ has been updated since I last looked at the relevant site;
My personal grateful thanks to all those who contributed to this wonderful ‘tree’. To go to the site to see much, much more click HERE
Is spirituality an intrinsic part of being human?
Two recent authors have challenged the fundamentalist-materialist position of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens that is so entirely unsympathetic to the religious, or more accurately the non-rationalist. They are Reason, Faith and Revolution, by Terry Eagleton and The Case for God, by Karen Armstrong. (They are reviewed HERE by Paul Vallely in the Independent.)
Here I want to appreciatively critique a passage from Chapter 2 of Eagleton’s book (p 83). The passage says;
Transcendence, however, did not simply go away. In one sense, this is precisely what Ditchkins (Dawkins + Hitchens) is complaining about; but the matter is more complex than that. The less plausibly religion seemed to answer to the human desire for a realm beyond science, material welfare, democratic politics and economic utility, the more robustly literature, the arts, culture, the humanities, psychoanalysis, and (the most recent candidate) ecology have sought to install themselves in that vacant spot. If the arts have accrued an extraordinary significance in a modern era for which they are, practically speaking, just another kind of commodity, it is because they provide an ersatz sort of transcendence in a world from which spiritual values have been largely banished.
The issues I have are;
1 Transcendence is a, more or less, normal part of being human like the mystical, of which transcendence is an essential part, like philosophizing, like sexuality, like breathing. It couldn’t go away unless every new human was subjected to a radical lobotomy. The ‘more or less’ depends on how crass or sensitive the individual’s education has been.
2 Instead of ‘desire for a realm’ I would prefer something like ‘intrinsic state of being’. That which Dawkins and Hitchens would expunge is not a faulty behaviour but an essential part of being human – possible hard-wired, associated with the structure and functioning of the right hemisphere of the brain.
3 Eagleton, like Armstrong is a successful critic of those he calls Ditchkins and a successful champion of this other ‘thing’ that isn’t the rational mind. But the ‘thing’ is not an aberration, a sop, a weakness, a behavioural defect, a culturally-induced pattern – it is a universal part of being human. Eagleton needs a better term for this ‘thing’, this part of being human that provides certain states being and engaging and knowing. He might do well to study Armstrong’s use of, and explanations of, ‘mythos’. However with her use I would plead that it start intra-personally otherwise it gets easily pushed out to being a thing in the social and cultural inter-personal world.
4 Failing to place mythos as art of being human leads Eagleton a set of judgments that are Ditchkins-esque in their severity. His list of literature, the arts, culture, the humanities, psychoanalysis, and (the most recent candidate) ecology are not vehicles for ersatz transcendence but vehicles for the real thing – because the transcendent or mystical experience is part of being human – from nature mysticism to sexuality.
5 To bring in, in this context, the horror of arts commodity-fication clouds the most important argument.
At the community level 60-80% of our friends are artists. They aren’t all crippled by commodity-fication. One or two perhaps but the possession of spiritual values is not synonymous with being religious, nor is the absence of conventional religiosity any bar to possessing spiritual values – as the Marxist Eagleton fully demonstrates.
Even at the Tate level of the arts commodity-fication is not primarily the issue. ‘Art now doing the job that philosophy used to do’ is as much the case as ‘art is now doing the job that religion used to do’. Then there is the issue of what gets in and what doesn’t get in. This is the prerogative of individual gate-keepers called curators, who along with particular critics, determine the particular kinds of discourse that will be presented. They only indirectly serve ‘the market’.
Transcendence, mystical experience and the possession or non-possession of spiritual values exist because we are human, and in the world with others. Good religion feeds these aspects of being human – and rationality for that matter. Bad religion blocks or distorts them.
Eagleton fails to establish that -”beyond-the-reasoning-mind part of being human which I feel is essential for the full success of his arguments. This is for want of a term such as mythos and secondly because he doesn’t start with the psycho-spiritual reality of what it is to be human.
Armstrong does so much better in this via her ‘we-need-a-balance-of-mythos-and-logos’ arguments in her ‘Case for God’, something I will celebrate in future posts.
I deal further with these and allied issues in my Spiritualizing Pedagogy: education as the art of working with the human spirit
As to the question, ‘Is spirituality an intrinsic part of being human?’ my answer is yes – good religion feeds these deeper aspects of being human – including rationality. Bad religion blocks or distorts them. As to the differences between the two that also is the subject for further pieces.
Marion Hofman told this story about the Knight of Baha’u'llah to the Orkney Islands, Charles Dunning.
Charlie was small, slightly strange-looking. The children in Kirkwall used to run after him and throw stones and sticks and call him names. He was simple and uneducated.
Charlie went on pilgrimage during the time of the Guardian. At dinner the other guests were shocked because Charles spoke very forcefully to the Guardian telling his views – and wagging his finger at the Guardian to emphasize his points. The Guardian laughed and took it all in good spirit.
Worse was to come. After the meal Charlie took out his packet of cigarettes, lit one and puffed away. Shock – horror!
The Guardian who loved Charlie (and I like to think was trying to deepen the other guests) instructed that a packet of 20 Players Navy Cut cigarettes be at Charlie’s dinner-table place for the remainder of the pilgrimage.
Roger’s comment:
At that meeting Marion Hofman had driven to the rest home where Charlie had retired to and brought him to the meeting to present him to us whilst she gave her eulogy. He was a rough diamond, done-up but still scruffy, a bit clown-like. This taught me powerfully that nobility comes in modest packages AND that the Guardian really knew the wheat from the chaff. Only God knows how many simpering idiots Shoghi Effendi had to put up with – Charles was very little but 100% the real thing – and I suspect refreshed the Guardian’s spirit.
The Guardian’s humanity cut through what we would now call political correctness. He understood the man’s sincerity was far more important than manners that were beyond Charlie’s experience.
QUESTION: “What exactly is religion, how’s it distinct from spirituality and what’s it for?”
1 “What is religion?” - Religion is organised spirituality –
a) self-organized, integrated, focused consciousness (+ or -) in the case of the individual,
b) group-organized in the case of sects etc.
2 “What is spirituality?” - Spirituality is that which isn’t physical. Includes the intellect!
3 “Again what is spirituality?” - Spirituality is feeling (heart) – preferably supported by reason, and right action.
Dawkins = ultimate narrow view
Karen Armstrong & Terry Eagleton = broad view
4 “Again what is spirituality?” - Spirituality is encounter and experience in how we relate to the unknown and unknowable – to Ultimate reality + reflection.
Subsequent to encounter spirituality becomes the eyes with which we see, the ears with which we hear
Belief, objectively true or false, is the meaning and motivation we derive from encounter, and allied experiences + reflection + study. This provides our worldview.
5 “What is mysticism?” – Mysticism (the real stuff c.f. self-delusion or mental illness) = the heart of spirituality, and (the means to) true religion –
”Mystical experience…..does not seem to me to be anything other than first-hand religious experience as such. This is, however, the core of religion…..…the explanatory function of religion is secondary and derivative.” (Hick)
6 “What is the worldview that each of us has?” - Our worldview is how we ‘read’ the world. Our worldview includes that of which are conscious, plus that which derives from enculturation & socialization.
7 “How is our worldview formed?” - Enculturation, socialization, beliefs and world-view determines our identity – and therefore our actions. (E.g. – Taliban – no school for girls, blow-up priceless Buddhist sculptures!)
8 “What is the process of true religion and spirituality?” – Becoming more fully conscious of Oneness, and its implications, and acting accordingly, is our purpose. (This is also a definition of faith ‘Consious knowledge + right action’.
9 So religion =
a) PERSONALLY – encounter experiences, inc. of Ultimate Reality, and reflectively what we make of them
b) SOCIALLY – any agreed set of relationships, teachings and customs held in common with any religious group of which one has membership, to which we subscribe.
10 Rituals, prayer, meditation & other practice = remembrance + short-cuts to possible encounter experiences (but thoughts of the washing or shopping may get in the way).
11 Progress in spirituality is measured by regularly bringing oneself to account – in relation to the standards of your spirituality, world-view and religious group/s (if any).
—–0—–
Etymological issues:
The English word “religion” is derived from the Middle English “religioun” which came from the Old French “religion.” It may have been originally derived from the Latin word “religo” which means “good faith,” “ritual,” and other similar meanings. Or it may have come from the Latin “religãre” which means “to tie fast.”
Start doing your own research:
One good starting point is provided by the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance. See HERE
The definitions I like best from this source are;
George Hegel: “the knowledge possessed by the finite mind of its nature as absolute mind.”
Paul Tillich: “Religious is the state of being grasped by an ultimate concern”
Others are;
The Religious Tolerance group tell us that David Carpenter has collected and published a list of definitions of religion, including:
1 Anthony Wallace: “a set of rituals, rationalized by myth, which mobilizes supernatural powers for the purpose of achieving or preventing transformations of state in man or nature.”
2 Hall, Pilgrim, and Cavanagh: “Religion is the varied, symbolic expression of, and appropriate response to that which people deliberately affirm as being of unrestricted value for them.”
3 Karl Marx: “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.”
Don Swenson defines religion in terms of the sacred: “Religion is the individual and social experience of the sacred that is manifested in mythologies, ritual, ethos, and integrated into a collective or organization.”
4 Paul Connelly also defines religion in terms of the sacred and the spiritual: “Religion originates in an attempt to represent and order beliefs, feelings, imaginings and actions that arise in response to direct experience of the sacred and the spiritual. As this attempt expands in its formulation and elaboration, it becomes a process that creates meaning for itself on a sustaining basis, in terms of both its originating experiences and its own continuing responses.”
5 He defines sacred as: “The sacred is a mysterious manifestation of power and presence that is experienced as both primordial & transformative, inspiring awe & rapt attention. This is usually an event that represents a break or discontinuity from the ordinary, forcing a re-establishment or recalibration of perspective on the part of the experiencer, but it may also be something seemingly ordinary, repeated exposure to which gradually produces a perception of mysteriously cumulative significance out of proportion to the significance originally invested in it.”
He further defines the spiritual as: “The spiritual is a perception of the commonality of mindfulness in the world that shifts the boundaries between self and other, producing a sense of the union of purposes of self and other in confronting the existential questions of life, and providing a mediation of the challenge-response interaction between self and other, one and many, that underlies existential questions.”
CONCLUSION to QUESTION: “What exactly is religion, how’s it distinct from spirituality and whats’ it for?”
“What exactly is religion,”
Religion personally = a) encounter experiences, inc. of Ultimate Reality, and what we make of them.
Religion socially/organizationally = any agreed set of relationships, teachings and customs held in common with any religious group of which one has membership, and to which we subscribe. The ‘to which we subscribe bit’ because many Catholics don’t agree with e.g. no-contraception and I once found that 40% of a class in a RC school believed in reincarnation!
“how’s it distinct from spirituality and”
Religion is a) ways to institutionalize organized spirituality and b) ways for maximising the chances for more religious experiences, and for hearing good reflection on such experiences. Moral behaviour and service action should follow! Spirituality is a natural and almost omnipresent part of being human like philosophising, creating, loving or breathing. Spirituality does necessarily need religion but, at best, can greatly benefit from it.
“whats’ it for?”
Religion, and responsible spirituality, are means to help us become more fully, positively and integratedly human in order to be of service to others. In doing this we develop higher-order qualities and virtues. It is not unreasonable to suppose that the absolute form of such qualities and virtues are the names and attributes of God, and that in acquiring them to an above average degree is worthy of the appellation ‘truly religious, truly spiritual’.
-0-
To read the full article by the Religious Tolerance group go HERE
Reference:
Hick, John, (1981) Mystical Experience as Cognition in Understanding Mysticism, ed. Richard Woods, London: The Athlone Press – p423
My final question – “Why are there so many religious intolerance groups?”
Dr Roger Prentice – main site = www.pre.me.uk
Wendi published a terrific list of human rights and responsibilities culled from the Baha’i writings - if you haven’t seen it it’s HERE
Here are a few observations on Wendi’s excellent list of human rights and responsibilities.
1) It missed out the sweet, healing balm of – humour. You can tell how civilized a country is by its attitude to satire and other forms of humour, (and we, quite rightly, are proud of Omid!). I guess humour is a sub-set of ‘freedom of expression’. The UK is still a great country – satire and humour generally was never in better shape in my 68 years (I know, I know I look so much younger!).
2) It wasn’t clear from the post and the ‘raw’ presentation of the list whether it,
a) is what we as Baha’is want for ourselves, or for others, or both.
b) is applicable to governments in the wider community or to religions, especially those religions that see themselves as subsuming political government into their religious viewpoint, as in Islamic republics – or again both.
2) It strikes me that the list goes from international to personal without visiting intermediate levels such as communities or families. I don’t doubt that Wendi or some other able author will write about how those rights and responsibilities are very useful in thinking about other spheres such as a) marriage and family life and b) how communities and individuals relate to each other – e.g. as in ‘It takes a village to raise a child.’ A country is a family writ large.
3) A very useful list of individuals who clearly didn’t have the right view of current Baha’i human rights and responsibilities has been supplied by Dr Moojen Momen. An analysis is HERE and the original paper is HERE
An earlier Christian apostate
This surely establishes another right in which we can set aside a whole range of admonishings such as not dealing harshly with the writings of men, avoiding gossip, back-biting and character-assassination, being forbearing, seeing with a sin-covering eye, no public humiliation, not taking on the responsibilities that rightly belong to institutions etc.
Terrific! I’m all for privatizing the calling out of lists of apostates to the world – I’m working on my first list right now. (By the way I had quite a problem tracking down the above links – my particular browser kept insisting that what I was looking for was Mormon Apostasy – very annoying.)
4) Purely theoretically of course, since the UHJ has absolute power in being infallible, and is in no way answerable to the electorate, it has the ‘right’ to abuse any of the rights in any way shape or form it decides. Is that a problem or have I misunderstood?
5) Wendi didn’t say – it wasn’t of course the purpose of her post – how the many moral injunctions of individuals or governments relate to safeguarding human rights and responsibilities. Moral injunctions? – any of the virtues or names and attributes of God. My preferred list starts with justice, truth, beauty and goodness.
The worst thing of course would be to have a great big gap between public protestation and inner reality – the hypocrisy of not ‘walking the talk’ or demanding a set of rights that we, in turn, refused to give. Thank goodness that’s not the case.
Thanks again for the great list – can you help with any of my questions Wendi, and any chance of a list of sources?
'Fear of Choice' painting by Baha'i artist Mona Shomali
Mona Shomali’s site is HERE
News update ‘ Prisoner of Conscience’ executed see HERE
-0-
Draft 1 16th July 2009
Sexual drive is at the heart of Freud’s view of being human. Desire for power is a the heart of Adler’s view. Frankl put the drive for meaning at the heart of his Logotherapy view of being human.
Perhaps these are reconcilable in a Baha’i perspective?
The key of course lies in the view that the physical world is a mirror of the spiritual. At the centre of sexual drive is the desire for at-one-ment – a kind of transcendence, longing for a (temporary) unitive state.
In the case of power we have to ask, ‘What kind, for what purpose?’ We all need empowerment to be empowered, to use power, personal or political, to good ends.
Frankl, who was for years a prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp, saw up-grading the meaning or significance of an event as a means to healing;
“If a prisoner felt that he could no longer endure the realities of camp life, he found a way out in his mental life – an invaluable opportunity to dwell in the spiritual domain, the one that the SS were unable to destroy. Spiritual life strengthened the prisoner, helped him adapt, and thereby improved his chances of survival.”
Frankl said;
“We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.”
`Abdu’l-Bahá of course was Master of this.
I can’t think of any greater body of meaning, or of meaning-making possibilities than the Baha’i teachings and vision for a world of harmonized diversity.
-0-
SunWALK Baha-i-inspired model and PhD are HERE
A method for individuals and communities to develop more – an alternative to Ruhi?
Many years ago I developed a deepening method, with Martin Cortazzi, that was very simple and very powerful. It was simply to apply the characteristics and processes of consultation to learning (using Kolstoe’s excellent book)!
Here is another allied process.
In this example I have used what has always struck me as one of the most powerful Hidden Words AHW2.
-0-
1) We start and end with the text ‘as is’.
O SON OF SPIRIT! The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes. AHW2
2) Next we look at the list of statements;
O SON OF SPIRIT!
1 The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice;
2 turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me,
3 and neglect it not that I may confide in thee.
4 By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes
5 and not through the eyes of others,
6 and shalt know of thine own knowledge
7 and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor.
8 Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be.
9 Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness.
10 Set it then before thine eyes.
AHW2
3) We seek to express what the statements say generally and to us as indivduals.
O SON OF SPIRIT!
1 The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice;
If justice is the best-beloved it should condition how we are, what we see, how we ‘read’ & act - all experience subjective, objective and moral
2 turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me,
Its absence cuts us off from God.
3 and neglect it not that I may confide in thee.
Without it breaths of the Holy Spirit (inspirations) cannot flow into/emerge from us.
4 By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes.
With it we will independently see reality – and consequently ‘read’ ourselves and the world accurately and pentratingly.
Via justice we will be independent-minded, authentic, self-actualizers – the opposite of clones who parrot the hegemony of others – and certainly not traders in gossip, back-biting, and character-assassination.
5 and not through the eyes of others,
Not via 2nd hand opinion, which is the inevitably subjective view-point of others. Be your own wo/man.
6 and shalt know of thine own knowledge
Our own knowledge is ‘within’ – AB tells us most of what we know is a direct gift of God, not from effort in book-learning
7 and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor.
The knowledge of our neighbour is hers/his, right for them, from the same source but since we are all individuals, praise be to God, different. Justice is the means to desirable diversity as well as to harmony. Harmony via homogeneity is death to diversity and therefore death to development.
8 Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be.
To realize these changes we have to ponder the significance and value of embedding justice in our heart-mind (not mind-heart).
9 Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness.
Justice is the key to reality and development – given out of love by God to humankind.
10 Set it then before thine eyes.
Does that mean outside or inside? Both – surely? My reading is that Justice is the ultimate filter/lens through which we should do all of our science, arts, and humanities, all of our parenting, partnering, managing, citizenship etc.
The last line also implies – shape up, get going, do it more!
4) We then decide how to take those insights and use them for the betterment of others, and ourselves.
5) We then return to the text ‘as is’.
O SON OF SPIRIT! The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes. AHW2
Go do it!
-0-
SunWALK Baha-i-inspired model and PhD are HERE
Where do human rights come from?
The best answer I heard was, “Human needs.”
A simple list of human rights
Right to live, exist.
To work for anyone
To own property
Speech
Security
Safety from violence
Protection from the law
Not being arrested unless there is reason to think someone has committed a crime
Having a fair trial
To be seen as innocent, even if a person is arrested, until the person is found to be guilty by a fair court
To be a citizen of a country
To vote
To seek asylum if a country treats you badly
To think freely
To believe and practice the religion a person wants
To peacefully protest (speak against) a government or group
To a basic standard of living (food, shelter, clothing, etc.)
Education
Health care (medical care)
That any adults of full age, no matter race, religion or sexuality, can marry.
More answers to the question of where human rights come from HERE
-0-
SunWALK Baha-i-inspired model and PhD are HERE
.jpg){kind=link}