Biblical discrepancies in God Passes By

30 September 1994 

Dear Bahá'í Friend,

We greatly regret the long delay in answering your letter of 15 February 1993 to the Research Department in which you draw attention to two discrepancies on page 95 of God Passes By. A correction to the first of these was approved by Shoghi Effendi in a letter written on his behalf on 7 June 1954. All National Spiritual Assemblies and Bahá'í Publishing Trusts were notified of this correction on 30 November 1988, namely that lines 6 and 7 of page 95 should read: "Zechariah had extolled Him as the 'Lord' Who 'shall be king over all the earth,' . . ."

Following the receipt of your letter, the Research Department studied the second discrepancy and found that, while the Guardian's final typescript has the same reading as the published version: "His Day Ezekiel and Daniel had, moreover, both acclaimed as the 'day of the Lord' . . .", the handwritten first draft contained many corrections and insertions, and it is not surprising that here too an error of attribution has occurred. As you point out, it is not possible to ascertain which of the prophets who mention the day of the Lord would have been quoted by Shoghi Effendi had this discrepancy been drawn to his attention.

The House of Justice does not wish to authorize at this time a change to the text of God Passes By to correct this attribution. There are a number of similar problems that have been found from time to time, and the House of Justice proposes, in due course, to consider the whole matter in detail and decide what action should be taken. It does not want to initiate a process of piecemeal correction.

Your own verse-by-verse study of the biblical references in God Passes By may reveal other discrepancies, and the House of Justice would greatly appreciate being informed of any that you come upon.

With loving Bahá'í greetings,

The Department of the Secretariat

(Baha’i Library Online)

Balance in life; Pioneering versus getting an education

4 September 1994 

Dear Bahá'í Friend,

Your letter dated 30 June 1994 has been received by the Universal House of Justice, and we have been asked to provide the following comments.

You have asked about finding a balance between being spontaneous, sincere and easy-going and also attending seriously to one's responsibilities and obligations. There are many factors, both external and internal, involved in forming one's character and learning to cope with the exigencies of life. Ultimately, each individual must work out a pattern for living, according to his understanding of the Teachings and the dictates of his conscience. One should seek to identify practical steps in each important area of one's life and then make a plan to effect these, resolutely surmounting obstacles, which can breed a sense of frustration and paralysis. According to one's position in the life cycle, certain activities will naturally be accorded a higher priority at a given moment than others, as each season offers possibilities that must be seized. You should have no undue anxiety about having to prioritize your time in this manner. Gradually, as one cultivates one's abilities and polishes the mirror of one's soul through prayer, meditation, and service, an underlying rhythm of life begins to emerge. Shoghi Effendi, in a letter written on his behalf to an individual, offered a valuable insight into the kind of life to which Bahá'ís ought to aspire:

The great thing is to "live the life"-- to have our lives so saturated with the Divine teachings and the Bahá'í Spirit that people cannot fail to see a joy, a power, a love, a purity, a radiance, an efficiency in our character and work that will distinguish us from worldly-minded people and make people wonder what is the secret of this new life in us.

Improving Our Understanding of the Cause of God

1 August 1994 

Dear Bahá’í Friend,

Your letter of 18 July 1994 has been received by the Universal House of Justice, which has asked us to send the following reply...

You have asked how you can “overcome [your] view of the Faith as flawed.” Your comment correctly locates the difficulty, which inheres not in the Faith, in itself perfect, but in the inability of the finite human mind to fully grasp the import and perfection of the Teachings. Given the tremendous variety of culture and individual type, it should be clear upon reflection to any fair-minded observer that the Revelation of God cannot accord with all of the theories, whims and desiderata of mankind, which are in a constant state of flux and are the product of limited human aspirations, very often corrupted by selfish motives. Nor could it possibly be true that the Revelation as a whole would necessarily appear to a given observer to be in every way a perfect tapestry, according with one’s subjective concepts of beauty, elegance, coherence, order, rationality, etc.

Thus, it would not be surprising if, during the course of one’s life and as one’s understanding and perspective evolves, from time to time one finds aspects of the Faith that seem in conflict with one’s best understanding, particularly insofar as that understanding is informed by the broader society or culture around oneself. How one responds to such episodes is of critical importance to the maintenance of one’s faith. The task is to seek a larger context in which to understand the issue which is disturbing and to seek to prayerfully accept what one cannot for the time being understand. This is different from adopting an antirational or romantic posture whereby one believes in all sorts of nonsense. Quite to the contrary, what one is doing in such a case is accepting the Teachings of One whose authority is acknowledged to be from God. This is the light of faith which enables a believer to weather difficult situations in which he cannot see his way clearly by the light of reason alone. It is an attitude which flows from a recognition of the finite nature of one’s own mind and the inevitable limitations of one’s experience. Bahá’u’lláh Himself urges us in the Hidden Words to “Pass beyond the baser stages of doubt and rise to the exalted heights of certainty.”

New Religious Movements; Indian Letter of the Living; J.R.R. Tolkien; The Marriage Bond; Illumination of Bahá'u'lláh's Tablets

Memorandum

6 July 1994

To: The Universal House of Justice

From: Research Department

The Research Department has studied the questions about various aspects of the Bahá'í Teachings raised by Mr. ... in his letter dated 27 May 1994 to the Universal House of Justice. We provide the following comment.

1. New Religious Movements

1.1 Station of founders

Mr. ... enquires about the Bahá'í perspective on such founders of religious groups and movements as the Reverend Moon (the Unification Church), Sai Baba, 'Maitreya (London)', the founder of Brahma Kumaris, Madame Blavatsky (Theosophy) and Alice Bailey (the Arcane School and the School of Esoteric Studies). He asks whether they are to be considered as false prophets or people who were influenced by the spirit released by the coming of Bahá'u'lláh and hence are fulfilling some special function like bringing more love and unity to the world.

As Mr. ... is, no doubt, aware, Bahá'ís do not expect the coming of a new Manifestation of God before the lapse of a thousand years. In this regard, the Universal House of Justice in a letter dated 11 May 1993 written on its behalf to a National Spiritual Assembly provided the following guidance concerning the Bahá'í view of the founder of the Sai Baba movement:

Bahá'ís, of course, cannot accept the claim of the founder of the movement, or his successor, that he is the equivalent of what we understand to be the Manifestation of God, even though he may have been inspired with the spirit of the age. It is clear in the Bahá'í Writings that such an august Figure is not to appear before the expiration of at least a full thousand years after the coming of Bahá'u'lláh.

As to the founders of the other groups, the Research Department has not been able to locate any specific references in the Bahá'í Writings to them. Mr. ... might be interested to know that in God Passes By Shoghi Effendi indicates that the prophecy concerning 'Maitreye, the Buddha of universal fellowship' (as distinct from 'Maitreya (London)'), is a reference to Bahá'u'lláh (1). Further, when the Guardian was asked about the status of a number of different religious groups and movements, his secretary, writing on his behalf, responded:

Bahá'í view towards homosexuality

3 May 1994 

Memorandum from the Research Department

The Research Department has studied carefully the letter of ... dated 17 August 1993 in which she raises a number of questions about the Bahá'í view towards homosexuality. These questions are of immediate and urgent concern to her, as she is herself in love with another Bahá'í woman, and is perplexed about how to reconcile what seem to her to be natural desires with the laws and principles of the Faith. We provide the following response.

By way of introduction, it may be useful to recall that the laws and ordinances of this Dispensation Bahá'u'lláh has specifically characterized as "the breath of life unto all created things", as "the mightiest stronghold", as the "fruits" of His "Tree", as "the highest means for the maintenance of order in the world and the security of its peoples", as "the lamps of His wisdom and loving providence", as "the sweet-smelling savour of his garment", as the "keys" of His "mercy" to His creatures. "This book" (The Kitab-i-Aqdas), He Himself testifies, "is a heaven which we have adorned with the stars of Our commandments and prohibitions." (Shoghi Effendi, extracted from God Passes By and published in The Kitab-i-Aqdas: The Most Holy Book [Haifa: Bahá'í World Centre, 1992] pp. 15-16)

As stated in the attached letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice,

"Bahá'ís believe that the love of God is evident in all His laws, no matter how severe some of them may appear to be, because He is revealing to us the purpose and true pattern for which we are created."

Schools owned by Bahá'ís and "Bahá'í schools"

30 March 1994 

Dear Bahá'í Friend,

The Universal House of Justice has received your fax of 7 February 1994 and instructed us to convey to you the following on its behalf.

The Universal House of Justice does not know of any text indicating that all Bahá'í educational facilities are to be owned by the institutions of the Faith. Presently, schools connected with the Faith fall into three categories: those that are administered by the institutions, those that are privately owned and operated by individuals, and those that are owned and directed by Bahá'í-inspired non-profit organizations. In the case of the latter two, the word "Bahá'í" does not appear in the name of the school.

As a national community grows, the activities undertaken by its members also increase in number and diversity. Some of these activities will be initiated and administered by Bahá'í institutions. Others will fall in the realm of private initiative. When an initiative is in the form of a private business venture undertaken by an individual or group, the institutions of the Faith have little reason to interfere with its daily affairs. In general, only if difficulties arise among the friends involved in such an enterprise, if their activities could damage the good name of the Faith, or if they misrepresent their relationship to the Faith, would a Local or National Spiritual Assembly intervene. Bahá'í institutions should, of course, welcome any effort by such private ventures to apply the Teachings to their operations and to use their position in society to further the interests of the Faith. Spiritual Assemblies would do well to offer them guidance, as requested or as circumstances require, and to help them develop their potential for the advancement of the Cause. A privately owned school would, naturally, enjoy a more intimate relationship with the institutions than would most other private enterprises, since the education of children and youth is a fundamental concern of the Faith.