68: "The concern was expressed that many of the friends, holding that
there..."
The concern was expressed that many of the friends, holding that there is
only one "correct" view of the history and teachings of the Faith, react
critically to unfamiliar views. This has already been covered in
statements made by the Universal House of Justice itself, for example that
on pages 88-89 of "Wellspring of Guidance". As you point out in your
letter, divine Revelation is infallible and proceeds from an
all-encompassing knowledge of the Truth, but when individual Baha'is
attempt to apply Sacred Texts to any specific problem or situation they do
so using their own minds which are of limited understanding. Thus, just as
people can differ from one another in their use of reason in making
deductions from available evidence, so they can also differ in their
understanding and application of a passage of divine Revelation. The
Baha'i principle of the harmony between science and religion requires, as
you say, that a Baha'i scholar must use his intelligence to arrive at a
solution of a specific problem if there is an apparent conflict between a
Sacred Text and other evidence; and also he must accept the fact that some
problems may defy his comprehension....
By conveying the comments of the Research Department on the ... Seminar(3)
the House of Justice did not intend to imply that there was only one valid
methodology for Baha'i historians to follow. It merely wished to alert
Baha'i scholars to the dangers that are inherent in the paths that some of
them are following at the present time. Historical research is largely a
matter of evaluating evidence and deducing probabilities. Historical
evidence, moreover, is always fragmentary, and may also be accidentally
erroneous or even intentionally fabricated. The House of Justice realizes
that you are fully aware of this, but it stresses the point because it
does not see how a Baha'i historian can in all honesty claim to be a
faithful believer on the one hand and, on the other, challenge in his
writings the veracity and honour of the Central Figures of the Faith or of
its Guardian.
The fact that the Faith, as the Guardian states, "enjoins upon its
followers the primary duty of an unfettered search after truth", should
reassure any aspiring Baha'i historian that there can be no question of
any requirement to distort history in the so-called "interests" of the
Faith. On the contrary, the combination of profound faith and freedom of
thought is one of the great strengths of the Baha'i religion. It does,
however, place a great responsibility upon Baha'i historians to put
forward their views and conclusions with moderation and due humility. In
this connection one of the Tablets of Baha'u'llah states:
Thou hast written that one of the friends hath composed a treatise. This
was mentioned in the Holy Presence, and this is what was revealed in
response: Great care should be exercised that whatever is written in these
days doth not cause dissension, and invite the objection of the people.
Whatever the friends of the one true God say in these days is listened to
by the people of the world. It hath been revealed in the Lawh-i-Hikmat:
"The unbelievers have inclined their ears towards Us in order to hear that
which might enable them to cavil against God, the Help in Peril, the
Self-Subsisting." Whatever is written should not transgress the bounds of
tact and wisdom, and in the words used there should lie hid the property
of milk, so that the children of the world may be nurtured therewith, and
attain maturity. We have said in the past that one word hath the influence
of spring and causeth hearts to become fresh and verdant, while another is
like unto blight which causeth the blossoms and flowers to wither. God
grant that authors among the friends will write in such a way as would be
acceptable
(18 July 1979 to an individual believer) [68]
69: "The House of Justice had hoped that the publication of the
statement..."
The House of Justice had hoped that the publication of the statement(4)
would stimulate discussion among Baha'i scholars and encourage them to
examine more profoundly all aspects of their work, and the effect it has
upon both Baha'i and non-Baha'i audiences. The aim was not to instruct
scholars to abandon any specific methodology but to warn them of the
dangers of taking for granted the a priori assumptions of modern
non-Baha'i scholars and of allowing their thinking and their understanding
of the Faith to be limited by criteria which they themselves, as Baha'is,
would know to be in error. It was also the hope of the House of Justice
that Baha'i scholars would realize the significance of the manner in which
they express themselves, and that they would guard against use of the
proud and scornful language with which some had been publicly referring to
their fellow believers who, nevertheless, were devotedly trying to serve
the Faith of God.
(8 October 1980 to an individual believer) [69]
70: "From your letter the House of Justice understands that you desire
to..."
From your letter the House of Justice understands that you desire to find
ways of conveying spiritual truths in logical ways and demonstrating their
validity through scientific proofs. There can be no objection to such an
attitude. 'Abdu'l-Baha Himself used such a method. The danger Baha'i
scholars must avoid is the distortion of religious truth, almost forcibly
at times, to make it conform to understandings and perceptions current in
the scientific world. True Baha'i scholars should guard against this. In a
letter to a National Spiritual Assembly dated 21 July 1968, the House of
Justice wrote:
While it may often be the part of wisdom to approach individuals or an
audience from a standpoint of current knowledge, it should never be
overlooked that the Revelation of the Manifestation of God is the standard
for all knowledge, and scientific statements and theories, no matter how
close they may come to the eternal principles proclaimed by God's
Messenger, are in their very nature ephemeral and limited. Likewise,
attempting to make the Baha'i Faith relevant to modern society is to incur
the grave risk of compromising the fundamental verities of our Faith in an
effort to make it conform to current theories and practices.
(7 June 1983 to an individual believer) [70]
71: "The principal concern of the House of Justice is over a
methodological..."
The principal concern of the House of Justice is over a methodological
bias and discordant tone which seem to inform the work of certain of the
authors. The impression given is that, in attempting to achieve what they
understand to be academic objectivity, they have inadvertently cast the
Faith into a mould which is essentially foreign to its nature, taking no
account of the spiritual forces which Baha'is see as its foundation.
Presumably the justification offered for this approach would be that most
scholars of comparative religion are essentially concerned with
discernable phenomena, observable events and practical affairs and are
used to treating their subject from a western, if not a Christian,
viewpoint. This approach, although understandable, is quite impossible for
a Baha'i, for it ignores the fact that our world-view includes the
spiritual dimension as an indispensable component for consistency and
coherence, and it does not beseem a Baha'i to write ... about his Faith as
if he looked upon it from the norm of humanism or materialism.
In other words, we are presented in such articles with the spectacle of
Baha'is trying to write as if they were non-Baha'is. This leads to these
authors' drawing conclusions and making implications which are in conflict
with Baha'i teachings and with the reality of the Faith. A good Baha'i
author, when writing for such a publication, should be fully capable of
adopting a calmly neutral and expository tone, without falling into the
trap of distorting the picture by adopting what is, in essence, a
materialistic and localized stance.
(4 October 1994 to a National Spiritual Assembly) [71]