A culture of disagreement

"The most striking feature of contemporary moral utterance is that so much of it is used to express disagreements; and the most striking feature of the debates in which these disagreements are expressed is their interminable character. I do not mean by this just that such debates go on and on and on - although they do - but also that they apparently find no terminus. There seems to be no rational way of securing moral agreement in our culture."

-- Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue: A study in moral theory (quoted in Paul Lample's Revelation and Social Reality)

Forbearance and humility

"In past Dispensations, the believers have tended to divide into two mutually antagonistic groups: those who held blindly to the letter of the Revelations, and those who questioned and doubted everything. Like all extremes, both of these can lead into error... Baha'is are called upon to follow the Faith with intelligence and understanding. Inevitably believers will commit errors as they strive to rise to this degree of maturity, and this calls for forbearance and humility on the part of all concerned, so that such matters do not cause disunity and discord among the friends."

-- From a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice, 1980

Science, religion and truth

Here's a thought provoking passage I came across, from one of Dr. Arbab's essays on science and religion. I think it presents a really key insight about the nature of truth, and how one can avoid the extremes of becoming either too ideological or skeptical. Would love to hear your thoughts on this, dear reader...

"I find quite inadequate the approach to the study of religion according to which the researcher is divided into two separate entities, the scientist and the believer, the first bound to the rules of academia and the second obliged to ignore the absurdities that this duality introduces into his or her belief system. That so untenable an approach should have achieved widespread acceptance is due to the impositions of secularism acting as a kind of fundamentalist creed. As a result, much of the reality of science, religion and the forces that transform society has ended up hidden behind a veil created by false objectivity.

The alternative to the prevailing situation is not apologetics or sectarian controversy. What is called for is a new look at the interpenetration of reason and faith, as well as a systematic exploration of rational approaches that are not tied to materialism...

An immediate consequence of this realization, it could be argued, is to require the researcher in certain fields to make explicit relevant aspects of his or her own belief and experience. To do so in a meaningful way, one must be convinced that it is possible to be firm in one's convictions without being judgmental. Although the statement, "if I believe something to be right, then he whose opinions differ from mine must be wrong" passes the tests of formal logic, and although it is applicable in countless situations, its usefulness vanishes once the object of discussion becomes relatively complex. It is not that "A" and "not A" can both be true, but that the vastness of truth does not allow most matters of belief, if there is any depth to them at all, to be reduced to such comparisons. The only options this simplistic posture finally leaves open are either religious and ideological fanaticism or the brand of relativism that does away with faith, embraces skepticism, and idolizes doubt. It is instructive to note how the assaults of such relativism on belief, initially launched against religion, have been directed in the postmodern era to the very foundations of science."

I find the last paragraph particularly illuminating on this search for truth. I have often struggled with the very quandary he states, of being firm in one's belief without becoming judgmental of others - and the insight provided here shows (in my opinion) a clear way to overcome this hurdle, by understanding one of the fundamental characteristics of reality, and our respective understandings of reality - that they are ultimately too complex to subject to such comparisons and judgments.

Thinking vs. feeling

Here's another extremely thought provoking passage from the same book, Immortality:

"I think, therefore I am is the statement of an intellectual who underrates toothaches. I feel, therefore I am is a truth much more universally valid, and it applies to everything that's alive. My self does not differ substantially from yours in terms of its thought. Many people, few ideas: we all think more or less the same, and we exchange, borrow, steal thoughts from one another. However, when someone steps on my foot, only I feel the pain. The basis of the self is not thought but suffering, which is the most fundamental of all feelings. While it suffers, not even a cat can doubt its unique and uninterchangeable self. In intense suffering the world disappears and each of us is alone with his self. Suffering is the university of egocentrism."

Human rights

Milan Kundera's Immortality is filled with thought provoking statements about the nature of humanity and our quest for immortality. However there is one particular excerpt I wish to share with you all, that seems to very aptly capture one aspect of human society today. Pay particular attention to the last 2 lines.

"And so, thanks to Solzhenitsyn, human rights once again found their place in the vocabulary of our times; I don't know a single politician who doesn't mention ten times a day 'the fight for human rights' or 'violations of human rights'. But because people in the West are not threatened by concentration camps and are free to say and write what they want, the more the fight for human rights gains popularity, the more it loses any concrete content, becoming a kind of universal stance of everyone towards everything, a kind of energy that turns all human desires into rights. The world has become man's right and everything in it has become a right..."

Science

One of the things that always drew me to the Baha'i teachings was its emphasis on science, and scientific thinking. In fact, Abdu'l Baha once wrote that "any religious belief that is not conformable with scientific proof and investigation is superstition" which I always thought was a wonderful standard to have. However, I just read a passage from the writings of Abdu'l Baha which gives a whole new meaning to the Baha'i understanding of science, and I felt I must share it with you all.

Science is the first emanation from God toward man. All created beings embody the potentiality of material perfection, but the power of intellectual investigation and scientific acquisition is a higher virtue specialized to man alone. Other beings and organisms are deprived of this potentiality and attainment. God has created or deposited this love of reality in man. The development and progress of a nation is according to the measure and degree of that nation’s scientific attainments. Through this means its greatness is continually increased, and day by day the welfare and prosperity of its people are assured.

All blessings are divine in origin, but none can be compared with this power of intellectual investigation and research, which is an eternal gift producing fruits of unending delight. Man is ever partaking of these fruits. All other blessings are temporary; this is an everlasting possession. Even sovereignty has its limitations and overthrow; this is a kingship and dominion which none may usurp or destroy. Briefly, it is an eternal blessing and divine bestowal, the supreme gift of God to man. Therefore, you should put forward your most earnest efforts toward the acquisition of science and arts. The greater your attainment, the higher your standard in the divine purpose. The man of science is perceiving and endowed with vision, whereas he who is ignorant and neglectful of this development is blind. The investigating mind is attentive, alive; the callous and indifferent mind is deaf and dead. A scientific man is a true index and representative of humanity, for through processes of inductive reasoning and research he is informed of all that appertains to humanity, its status, conditions and happenings. He studies the human body politic, understands social problems and weaves the web and texture of civilization. In fact, science may be likened to a mirror wherein the infinite forms and images of existing things are revealed and reflected. It is the very foundation of all individual and national development. Without this basis of investigation, development is impossible. Therefore, seek with diligent endeavor the knowledge and attainment of all that lies within the power of this wonderful bestowal.

A pure heart

I'm always blown away by this passage whenever I read it...

O My Brother! A pure heart is as a mirror; cleanse it with the burnish of love and severance from all save God, that the true sun may shine within it and the eternal morning dawn. Then wilt thou clearly see the meaning of “Neither doth My earth nor My heaven contain Me, but the heart of My faithful servant containeth Me.” And thou wilt take up thy life in thine hand, and with infinite longing cast it before the new Beloved One.

-- Baha'u'llah

Individual and social transformation

Living a Baha'i life involves the twofold purpose of individual and social transformation. However most institutions in society today focus on one or the other more. Religions of the past have largely tended to focus on individual change - purifying the self, becoming a better person, establishing a personal connection with God etc - believing that this will lead to widespread change in society. Most non-religious social institutions on the other hand focus on social transformation - governments enact laws governing all of society, policies are made that change the nature of the economy etc - there isn't much effort made to transform the individual (save in the field of education). It is assumed that people are who they are, and then institutions are devised so as to cater to people as they are.

However there is a very dynamic interplay between the individual and society, and it is essential to work at transforming both simultaneously. This was brought home to be especially strongly as I read the following excerpt from a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi:

"We cannot segregate the human heart from the environment outside us, and say that once one of these is reformed everything will be improved. Man is organic with the world. His inner life molds the environment and is itself also deeply affected by it. The one acts upon the other and every abiding change in the life of man is the result of these mutual reactions."

So what, dear reader, are ways in which this simultaneous transformation can happen?

Hermeneutical principles

Paul Lample's "Revelation and Social Reality" provides, amongst other things, an excellent summary of some of the hermeneutical principles (principles that deal with the interpretation of scriptural writings) presented in the Baha'i writings. I offer a short listing of these principles, along with some extracts from the book that explain these for the reader to ponder and apply as he/she engages in his/her own personal study of the many religious writings we have available to us.

1. The Book has intended meaning - "We cannot simply read into the Text any meaning we wish or use quotations out of context to justify personal opinions. Our views may be right and they may be wrong, or they may reflect a partial understanding, depending on the measure of their correspondence to Baha'u'llah's (or any of the other Manifestations') intention." Some philosophers have argued that a book has no intended meaning, and even the author often cannot know what the meaning of a book is - it is left to the reader to interpret. The Baha'i stance on this states that at least the writings of the Prophets and their authorized interpreters do not fit into this category.
2. Judgments about meaning should be made from the perspective of the Revelation - "We should not weight the Book of God with human standards and sciences, since 'the Book itself is the unerring balance established amongst men'".
   
3. There is no contradiction between authoritative passages - "It may appear that certain statements in the Book contradict one another. But a difference in context or emphasis or the exploration of a single reality from different perspectives should not be misconstrued as contradiction... If a personal interpretation of a passage contradicts the Text or its authoritative interpretation, that individual interpretation is erroneous." This provides us with one way of testing our individual interpretations of these writings.
4. Meaning is sometimes explicit and sometimes veiled - "At times we are dealing with explicit meanings and an esoteric interpretation would be inappropriate and incorrect... At other times a verse has deeper meanings, and trying to hold to the outward understanding can lead to rigidity or confusion." Some things are to be taken literally, some metaphorically. And figuring out which to use in any situation that is unclear is done on the basis of some of the other hermeneutical principles listed here.
5. The meaning of the Book cannot be exhausted - "This opens the Text to a range of individual interpretations, including instances in which an authoritative interpretation has been made. For example, after presenting an interpretation of the meaning of the story of Adam and Eve, Abdu'l Baha explains - 'This is one of the meanings of the biblical story of Adam. Reflect unti you discover the others.' However this concept does not imply relativism - personal interpretations are not all equally valid, and some are erroneous. Rather, meaning continually emerges through study and application throughout one's lifetime and over the entire course of the dispensation in a changing historical context."
6. Truth unfolds progressively within the dispensation - "The meaning of the Revelation is intentionally disclosed in a gradual manner over time. 'Consider the sun,' Baha'u'llah explains, 'How gradually its warmth and potency increase as it approaches its zenith...' He also states - 'Not everything that a man knoweth can be disclosed, nor can everything that he can disclose be regarded as timely, nor can every timely utterance be considered suited to the capacity of those who hear it.'" This dynamic revelation of truth is essential, as it enables people to make the transition from their established ways of thinking to a new way of viewing the world and their lives/actions.
   
7. Understanding is influenced by the stages of the Faith's organic development - This is more specifically written wrt the Baha'i Faith's development in the last 150 or so years, but can also be applied to other religions by looking at their history. "The Baha'i community evolves organically over time and certain passages may pertain to specific stages in this developmental process." The Universal House of Justice explains this through a simile - "If a farmer plants a tree, he cannot state at that moment what its exact height will be, the number of its branches or the exact time of its blossoming. He can, however, give a general impression of its size and pattern of growth and can state with confidence which fruit it will bear. The same is true of the evolution of the World Order of Baha'u'llah." In past dispensations errors arose because the believers "were overanxious to encompass the Divine Message within the framework of their limited understanding, to define doctrines where definition was beyond their power, to explain mysteries which only the wisdom and experience of a later age would make comprehensible, to argue that something was true because it appeared desirable and necessary."
8. Personal interpretations of the meaning of the Text should be weighed in the light of science and reason - This seems pretty clear to me :) Abdu'l Baha states, "If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science, they are mere superstitions and imaginations...". However, there is one thing to be aware of - "it is vital to appreciate that in certain cases, rather than intending to convey a scientific truth, a passage in the Text uses scientific concepts according to the understanding of the people as a way of illustrating a spiritual theme." This is really important to understand, I think, as otherwise one might view some statement as being contradictory to the standards of science - while all it was was an analogy to explain some other more important spiritual principle. A clear example of this is Abdu'l Baha's use of the analogy of the concept of ether to illustrate the unknowability of God. In one passage he says, "The Divine Essence as it is in itself is however beyond all description. For instance, the nature of ether is unknown, but that it existeth is certain by the effects it produceth, heat, light and electricity being the waves thereof. By these waves the existence of ether is thus proven. And as we consider the outpourings of Divine Grace we are assured of the existence of God." The purpose here is to discuss human understanding of God, not prove the existence of ether. This is made clear in another passage of Abdu'l Baha's where he says that "Even ethereal matter, the forces of which are said in physics to be heat, light, electricity and magnetism, is an intellectual reality, and is not sensible." In other words, the ether is an intellectual concept used to explain certain phenomena. Over time as scientists couldn't verify its existence, they constructed other intellectual concepts to explain phenomena.
9. History and context have implications for understanding the meaning of the Text - Understanding context can be very important for grasping the meaning of a Text. However, "this does not imply that meaning of scripture is circumscribed by its particular context and that no general insights or principles can be drawn from it and applied universally... Hermeneutical practice must be concerned with both the particular and universal implications of the Writings..." We must also strive to avoid two extremes - one which is to insist that everything in the Writings can only be understood in the context of historical evidence, and the second which is to ignore the historical context or assume that all which is presented in the Text is historical fact - some statements, as was explained in the earlier point about science, are presented to people as analogies based on the particular understanding of the audience being addressed.
   

More on consultation

In a brief conversation with A, I realized that the context for the second quote in the post below is important - it should not be taken in isolation from other spiritual qualities. Clearly one should not be a mute bystander to injustice, for example. Understanding the principle of unity in decision-making (even if it is not the ideal decision) is something that can be better understood in the context of the main principles of consultation. Here's an extract from the worldwide Baha'i website that summarizes these principles well:

The principles of consultation were laid down in Bahá'u'lláh's writings, and, as a procedure for building consensus and investigating truth, they have the potential for wide application. Indeed, Bahá'ís have found them to be useful in virtually any arena where group decision-making and cooperation is required. These principles are used not only by the Faith's own institutions, but in Bahá'í-owned businesses, in Bahá'í-operated schools, and in day-to-day decision-making of Bahá'í families.

In essence, consultation seeks to build consensus in a manner that unites various constituencies instead of dividing them. It encourages diversity of opinion and acts to control the struggle for power that is otherwise so common in traditional decision-making systems.

Bahá'í consultation is based on the following principles:

* Information should be gathered from the widest possible range of sources, seeking a diversity of points of view. This may mean making special efforts to seek the views of specialists--such as lawyers, doctors, or scientists. It may also mean looking for information outside traditional specialties or making a special effort to consider the views of community members from diverse backgrounds.
* During discussion, participants must make every effort to be as frank and candid as possible, while maintaining a courteous interest in the views of others. Personal attacks, blanket ultimatums and prejudicial statements are to be avoided.
* When an idea is put forth it becomes at once the property of the group. Although this notion sounds simple, it is perhaps the most profound principle of consultation. For in this rule, all ideas cease to be the property of any individual, sub-group, or constituency. When followed, this principle encourages those ideas that spring forth from a sincere desire to serve, as opposed to ideas that emanate from a desire for personal aggrandizement or constituency-building.
* The group strives for unanimity, but a majority vote can be taken to bring about a conclusion and make the decision. An important aspect to this principle is the understanding that once a decision is made, it is incumbent on the entire group to act on it with unity - regardless of how many supported the measure.

In this sense, there can be no "minority" report or "position of the opposition" in consultation. Rather, Bahá'ís believe that if a decision is a wrong one, it wlll become evident in its implementation--but only if the decision-making group and, indeed, the community at large, support it wholeheartedly.

This commitment to unity ensures that if a decision or a project fails, the problem lies in the idea itself, and not in lack of support from the community or the obstinate actions of opponents.

The final section of the above extract gives some clear reasoning as to why this principle of unity is important. And it does make one wonder - how many policies, projects, actions and ideas fail because they are truly wrong/bad? And how many fail because of opposition from people, disunity and contention?