Dear David,
Your analysis could be true only if that single verse from the Writings was to be available on the whole topic of politics. As explained in the Writings, many laws of the Faith are evolutionary in nature and undergo the law of change by passing of the time, i.e., many instructions in the Writings are provisional measures and change by passage of time. Shoghi Effendi wrote:
"If certain instructions of the Master are today particularly emphasized and scrupulously adhered to, let us be sure that they are but provisional measures designed to guard and protect the Cause in its present state of infancy and growth until the day when this tender and precious plant shall have sufficiently grown to be able to withstand the unwisdom of its friends and the attacks of its enemies." (Shoghi Effendi)
The law/regulation of non-involvement in political affairs also is one of those laws which undergo change by time and place. The Universal House of Justice wrote:
"The general policy already enunciated by Shoghi Effendi in The World Order of Bah�'u'll�h, pages 63-67, should be scrupulously upheld by the friends. However, as the Faith emerges from obscurity, the application of certain aspects of this policy will require the clarification of the House of Justice. With the passage of time, practices in the political realm will definitely undergo the profound changes anticipated in the Bah�'� writings. As a consequence, what we understand now of the policy of non-involvement in politics will also undergo a change; but as Shoghi Effendi has written, this instruction, 'at the present stage of the evolution of our Faith, should be increasingly emphasized, irrespective of its application to the East or to the West.'" (Universal House of Justice)
Best regards,
Max.
|
|This passage struck me when I read it:
|
|O handmaid
of the Lord! Speak thou no word of politics; thy
|task concerneth
|the
life of the soul, for this verily leadeth to man's joy in
|the world
of
|God. Except to speak well of them, make thou no mention of the
earth's
|kings, and the worldly governments thereof.
|
|--
`Abdu'l-Bah�, Selections from the Writings of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 92.
|
|This
passage seems to indicate that kings, whether literally
|kings or
not,
|are a part of politics. The King of Samoa is a Baha'i,
yet
|the House of
|Justice hasn't told him to abdicate. Is the King
of Samoa involved in
|politics in his role? From what I have heard he
isn't involved with
|parties. As I understand a Baha'i could not enter
the Senate
|or run for
|President in the US, because that would be
political
|involvement. Of course
|the role of king and president
has tended to be quite
|different. I talked to
|a family member about this
passage who thought it doesn't have
|to be read as
|indicating that kings
are by definition people who are
|involved in politics.
| That could
well be, but the wording doesn't appear to be the
|clearest.
|
|I'm not
too clear on Baha'u'llah's point in allowing kings,
|but I suspect
|that
will all be ditched in the next Dispensation. No one
|will want to be
a
|king anyway, apparently. What exactly would be the purpose
of
|kings in a
|Baha'i world? To take some of the load off the
institutions?
|
|Regards,
|
|David
|
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)
