"The woman is indeed of the greater importance to the race. She has the
greater burden and the greater work. Look at the vegetable and the animal
worlds. The palm which carries the fruit is the tree most prized by the date
grower. The Arab knows that for a long journey the mare has the longest
wind. For her greater strength and fierceness, the lioness is more feared by
the hunter than the lion...
"The woman has greater moral courage than the man; she has also special
gifts which enable her to govern in moments of danger and crisis."
('Abdu'l-Bah� in London, 1982 U.K. edition, pp. 102-103)
Yes, it is not just this passage that indicates that women are of the greatest importance to humanity. 'Abdu'l-Baha also said:
In some respects woman is superior to man. She is more tender-hearted, more receptive, her intuition is more intense.
(`Abdu'l-Baha: Paris Talks*, Page: 161)
Now I wonder if someone could tell me, is there any place in Baha'i texts in which it is ever said that men are superior in any respects (aside from physical strength), and if so, what? My assumption is that they are not better in any aspects spiritually. Perhaps that's why it's the women who give birth, and are to be the first educators of their children? 'Abdu'l-Baha said that the influence of the mother would cause their children to remain believers, but not so with the father. 'Abdu'l-Baha said that the future happiness of the children is dependent on the mother. While they aren't allowed to be on the House of Justice, let's remember that it is thanks to them that their children are elected to the House of Justice. 'Abdu'l-Baha also said that women would end war, as they wouldn't allow their children to be killed. In the first quote 'Abdu'l-Baha pointed to her ability to govern, and indeed gave examples of women such as Zenobia, who were very capable. Hence, one can't argue that the Writings give any support to the idea that women can't serve in a ruling capacity. Nowhere is it stated that no woman could possibly handle serving on the House of Justice, or if one were put on would do a poor job. There is no reason to assume that such might be the case. Furthermore, notice that 'Abdu'l-Baha said of women, "She has the greater burden and the greater work." In other words, women have more on their plate, and that this is so is very well attested in the Writings. In this light, why should the exclusion of women from the International body, which obviously imposes great demands on a person's time, be surprising? Shouldn't it even be *expected*, and shouldn't her exclusion be *more fair* than her inclusion? I don't think "fair" is the way to put it, but since women have things that they only can do, such as raising children and attending women's meetings to discuss the training of girls ('Abdu'l-Baha even mentions the study of physical health, so as to have healthy children; this is not something males have to study), why shouldn't there be at least *one* thing that is restricted to men only in the Baha'i Faith, if anything so as not to put women too much *above* men in terms of their contribution to the human race, the picture given in the Baha'i Writings? If you read what is said about the role of women in bringing up children it is evident that the welfare of the human race, until the next *male* Prophet, is in the hands of women. Men are not above women in the Baha'i Faith. They aren't very tender-hearted, receptive, intuitive, courageous, or good at leading under pressure. They are *allowed* to be on Local and National Assemblies, but it could be (I'm not saying that this would happen) that they might never get elected to these bodies. But, they have to be on the House of Justice. That is the only body whose membership is predetermined by gender. The qualities that women have over men do not seem to have relevance to House of Justice functioning, though one might cite men's lesser ability to govern in times of crisis. No doubt there will be many times of crisis prior to the next Prophet in which the House of Justice will rule. But given that the male House members as a body have conferred infallibility, this is not an issue. I've never seen anything in the Writings about women being more just than men. Has anyone else? IMO, the memership of the House of Justice is not that way because no woman could do the job well, or well without failing to do something she should do as a woman, but is rather symbolic of women's different role. I'm inclined to think the reason for male membership is due to women having more to do, with the work in raising children. No, not all women are involved in this, and that might be the case when elected to the House of Justice, but I see the symbolic reason as of importance. Would it be unfair that those women who had time on their hands wouldn't be allowed to serve? See this makes me laugh, because I don't think it would be easy to find any person who was jumping for joy on getting elected to a National Assembly, knowing the work involved. The House of Justice is even worse as far as work goes. How would women's exclusion disadvantage them? When we realize that the nine members of the House of Justice individually have no power and no authority, women's exclusion should seem unimportant. Furthermore, the members of the House of Justice receive their guidance from *God,* not their own personal male genius. To realize where the guidance is coming from is important to the analysis of this issue. The members are just channels, and they just happen to be males. Women are also to serve as channels, in their religious education to the children. Which is more important out of the women's service in this regard, and the House of Justice? I don't know, and I'm not sure how it could be quantified, but I don't see how it matters. The service is to the entire planet in both instances. Also, note that, while being a member of the House of Justice might be said to give someone some rank, it doesn't by definition give someone a high spiritual rank. Note that the House of Justice, in their Constitution, provide for the possibility that a House member might be expelled for conduct. Having said this, the women appointed as Hands of the Cause by Shoghi Effendi do, by definition, have high spiritual stations. The roles played by Hands of the Cause are, in their basics, the same as the House of Justice, and other Assemblies for that matter. Of course I might note that the appointment of a person as a Hand of the Cause only gives them a high station when they are appointed. They can later go bad, as did Mason Remey. So I don't think exclusion from House of Justice membership disadvantages women. Even if they were allowed on, only a small percentage of women in the entire planet would ever be elected, and given that there are so many fewer members on the House of Justice, with incumbency virtually assured, to point to the exclusion of women on the House of Justice as a travesty of justice seems a minor quibble.
Just my thoughts.
Regards, David
_________________________________________________________________ Check out the Xtra gaming servers at http://xtramsn.co.nz/gaming !
---------- You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.jccc.net/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=bahai-st news://list.jccc.net/bahai-st http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist (public) http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (public)
