Website Suggestion

[radarmark]

In what short time I had looking over some academic references (let's hear it for Google Scholar), it appears you are right on, Ruth White (I wonder if I should call myself "James Naylor"). If you have time post or PM some references to me.

 

[Ruth White]

My point is simply that there are many paths, none better and none worse. It is the Light Within that is important, not what language or exoteric form it has.

I can agree wholeheartedly with that. To my mind, it's what is shared and held in common by the religions, what is universal that counts, and the Light Within is definitely the Source...

The "exoteric form" is inevitably the problem getting in the way...

 

[wil]

Since I believe anyone (from atheist to pagan) can be a Quaker, I find it easy to accpet the idea of "one religion"

Wouldn't that be Atheist to Zoroastrian?

If ya stop at Pagans, ya leave out Sikhs and Sufis and Taoists and ....

 

[Ruth White]

In what short time I had looking over some academic references (let's hear it for Google Scholar), it appears you are right on, Ruth White (I wonder if I should call myself "James Naylor"). If you have time post or PM some references to me.

James Naylor, the Quaker? Wouldn't kiss the hand of George Fox! I like the spirit!

Google "Reform Bahai Faith" for the web site, under Early Reform Bahais > Ruth White. Skim down to the link to what is her most important book:

Ruth White. Abdul Baha's Questioned Will and Testament. Beverly Hills: White, 1946.

There are a lot of extracts from it on that web page, if you want to read or skim first.

Similarly, under Early Reform Bahais, Ahmad Sohrab, Julie Chanler, Janebe Fazl, C. Ainsworth Mitchell's Report, read or skim to your interest.

The integrity of soul of the first three was proven when the Haifan Baha'i imam Shoghi Effendi declared them kuffar, infidels...

 

[wil]

So while we have thousands of Christian Denominations and dozens of Islamic Sects and as far as I know really 5 main separations in Judaism...

What about Bahai....

Can someone provide the various offshoots that still call themselves Bahai, their differences, their websites, their approximate percentage of adherents?

 

[Ahanu]

Baha'i I have spoken to seem quite ignorant of the basic 'nature' of the Christian message, I think it's an unfounded assumption.

But when we dialogue with another person, we are not just beginning a dialogue with an individual: we dialogue with the entire social network that has influenced that individual. So, in a sense, we drag community social discourse with us too. Trust me when I write,

Your version of Christianity is way, way, way different from the Christianity I grew up with.

So when you say "Baha'i I have spoken to seem quite ignorant of the basic 'nature of the Christian message,'" then, when speaking to me, you are also saying the Baptist Church community I grew up in is also ignorant of the basic nature of the Christian message.

I'm still unlearning my ignorance of the Catholic faith. Learning about a religion is like learning a new language: it takes a lot of time. Therefore, I think you should think twice before you judge Baha'is you have spoken with as ignorant of the Christian message because of influence from Baha'i thought. In fact it's Baha'i thought which makes me want to learn about your tradition. So chill, Thomas.

If I was still a Southern Baptist Christian I would most likely not be willing to learn about the Catholic tradition. Scratch out most likely. No.

 

[Ruth White]

What about Bahai....

Can someone provide the various offshoots that still call themselves Bahai, their differences, their websites, their approximate percentage of adherents?

I'm a newcomer here, so I have the 10 post limit prohibiting links.

Here's my account of "9 Bahai Denominations" from which I've removed the links:

The Orthodox Baha'i lawyer Jeffrey Goldberg in his Response to the 2006 lawsuit that is currently being brought against other Bahai denominations in the Courts of Illinois rightly points out that there are now 9 denominations of the Bahai Faith. (I believe there has now evolved a 10th Baha'i denomination.)

"There are at least nine organizations now existing and operating at some level that practice a denomination of the "Bahá'í" religion (Goldberg Decl., Para. 51; Schlatter Decl., Para. 18-21). One is not a Bahá'í because of which denomination one belongs to, one is a Bahá'í because of the system of set of beliefs and doctrines one holds. The NSA's own web site defines a Bahá'í in this manner (Schlatter Decl., Para. 43)."

Nine Denominations (10):

Four Orthodox Bahai denominations, believing Charles Mason Remey was the successor to Shoghi Effendi.

1) Orthodox Bahá'í Faith (the OBF Respondents, following Joel B.
Marangella);
2) Bahá'ís Under Provisions of the Covenant (the other Respondents,
following Leland Jensen);
3)Tarbiyat Bahá'í Community (formerly known as Orthodox Bahá'ís Under the
Regency) (Rex King group);
4) Bahá'ís Under the living Guardianship
(Donald Harvey as the third
Guardian and Jacques Soghomonian as the fourth Guardian), an organization
that is the successor to the Remey NSA;

Three denominations believing that the 1921 unprobated will & testament of Abdul-Baha is a fraudulent document and that Abdul-Baha did not appoint Shoghi Effendi or anyone else as a successor, but that he looked forward to a "spiritual democracy, not a theocracy," with ultimately an elected Universal House of Justice.
5) Reform Bahai Faith
6) Free Baha'is
7) Unitarian Baha'is

One denomination believing in the authenticy of the unprobated, unauthenticated will and testatment of Abdul-Baha, which they believe appointed in 1921Shoghi Effendi as a guardian, a Shiite mullah or pope-like figure controlling a theocratic world order.

8) The Bahá'í Faith or Bahá'í World Faith (the Movant NSA) - (AKA Haifan Baha'is)

One denomination believing the next Manifestation of God is imminent, rather than appearing in a thousand years as prophesied by Baha'u'llah.

9) John Carre (followers of Alif a Third Manifestation of God - the third
letter of the Greatest Name)
THE SPIRITUAL FOUNDATION OF SOCIETY
AN ISLAND OF HOPE
TARIQAT


10) I would add a 10th denomination. The so-called "unenrolled Baha'is" or "indepdendent Baha'is" who in some sort of quixotic dream await the uhj to wake up or reform itself into the liberal, sane, moderate religion that both Baha'u'llah and Abdul-Baha clearly taught and envisioned, yet who, in their implicit exemplification of Abdul-Baha's Teaching that the Bahai Movement cannot be organzied, essentially follow, partway, the practice of the Reform Bahais, who realize that the only course now open at this historical juncture is to renew and return to the Example and Interpretation of the Center of the Covenant, the 1912 Covenant, the authentic Covenant of Abdul-Baha.

For those unfamiliar with the Haifan nsa's attempt to deprive other Bahais of their first amendment rights of liberty and freedom of religious conviction, I urge you to read the documents involved on both sides at

Jeffrey Goldberg has further annotated a few of the nine denominations mentioned above:

"NSA-UHG = The National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States Under the Hereditary Guardianship. This was the entity against whom the 1966 Judgment was entered -- the NSA under Mason Remey --.

PNBC = The Provisional National Baha'i Council of the United States - the national governing body of the Orthodox Baha'i Faith (OBF) and one of the entities the Wilmette NSA brought into court.

SIBC - This is the Second International Baha'i Council. Involved in the action brought by the Wilmette NSA, the SIBC was the governing body of the Jensen group. This has nothing to do with the OBF. The SIBC also was the name of an unrelated body under Mason Remey of the same name.

BPUPC - Baha'i Publishers Under the Provisions of the Covenant - One of the entities the NSA brought contempt charges against and it is related to the Jensen/ Chase group and not to the OBF."

For a historical perspective, see the documents at Lawsuit by Wilmette NSA Against Other Denominations

One can only hope the Court will be wise enough to understand what is truly involved. [which fortunately it did, in its November 2010 Opinion, available on the Internet via "The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience"; Google it or "9 Baha'i Denominations" for links.

Hope this helps give you the larger picture of Bahai. Most people who are only familiar with the Haifan Baha'is and their books and sources don't know anything about the others... for obvious reasons.

 

[radarmark]

RW, thanks!

 

[wil]

RW, thanks!

ditto!

So from what I can find 98% are of the Haifa variety?

The other nine denominations are distinct and distant minorities?

RW it seems you follow closely the contender of the will... why is it that most don't believe the contention? Is there other ill will at foot?

It seems reading about the Sunni Shi'ite split it is an old arguement more social/political than religious is this the same?

 

[arthra]

Ruth wrote:

Like all of the institutionalized Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition, the usurpers of the Bahai Movement or Cause, created a creed, calling it a Covenant, judged a forged document by the previously mentioned document expert at the British Museum, C. Ainsworth Mitchell.

Note the broad sweeping generalization:

Like all of the institutionalized Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition

Well and once again we have the "animus"... A single handwriting expertmust be right? I mentioned earlier that Frederick/Ruth dismisses the Will and Testament of Abdul-Baha as a forgery..of course with one "expert" from the British Museum we are supposed to agree? This matter has been presented a long time ago and the vast majority of Baha'is long ago rejected the allegation of Ruth.


Here is the other side of the story:

Another person who rose up in opposition to Shoghi Effendi and to the establishment of the institutions of the Faith was Mrs Ruth White in the United States. A veteran believer, she had visited 'Abdu'l-Bahá in the Holy Land in 1920. She claimed that the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Bahá was not authentic and created much agitation in the community by attacking the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States and Canada, whose establishment she considered to be against the teachings and wishes of 'Abdu'l-Bahá. For several years Mrs White persevered in her determination to prevent the establishment of the institutions of the Faith. One of her actions was to write a letter to the United States Postmaster General asking him, among other things, to prohibit the National Spiritual Assembly from 'using the United States mails to spread the falsehood that 300 Shoghi Effendi is the successor of 'Abdu'l-Bahá and the Guardian of the Bahá'í Cause'.[253]
[253 Quoted in Rabbani, Priceless Pearl, p. 119.]

Another of Mrs White's letters was addressed to the High Commissioner for Palestine. In it she completely misrepresented the position of Shoghi Effendi but the authorities in the Holy Land were well aware of the facts and did not heed her appeals.

Mrs White also wrote many letters to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States and Canada, as well as to some believers, vehemently objecting to the directives of Shoghi Effendi and the administration of the Cause through the local and national institutions. One of Mrs White's converts was Dr Herrigel, a founding member of the German Bahá'í community. He, too, rejected the authority of the Will and Testament and became numbered among the Covenant-breakers.

It is interesting to note that no one who has studied the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, with the exception of Mrs White and a few others whom she influenced, has ever questioned its authenticity. Even other Covenant-breakers who rose up against Shoghi Effendi did not agree with her. Ahmad Sohrab and Subhi for example, who had both served 'Abdu'l-Bahá as His secretary, never questioned the authenticity of the Will. Neither did Muhammad-'Ali, nor Badi'u'llah nor other enemies who were looking for any excuse they could find to attack the Guardian of the Faith.

It must be remembered that the Will and Testament was in 'Abdu'l-Bahá's handwriting and bore His seal. These were very familiar to the Persian believers because 'Abdu'l-Bahá had written innumerable Tablets in His own hand and almost every Bahá'í family in Persia had received one or mote of them. Thus, when the photostatic text of the Will and Testament was sent to Persia and elsewhere, it was easily acknowledged by everyone to be in the handwriting of 'Abdu'l-Bahá.

Another criterion for the Will's authenticity was 'Abdu'l-Bahá's unique style and mode of expression, with which the Persian 'friends were familiar. Indeed, anyone who is versed in the writings of the Faith in the original language can easily tell the difference between the writings of Bahá'u'lláh, 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi, as each has its own special tone and style.

~ Adib Taherzadeh, The Child of the Covenant, p. 299

You can read the Will and Testament of Abdul-Baha at

http://bahai-library.com/writings/abdulbaha/wt/

 

[Ruth White]

ditto!

So from what I can find 98% are of the Haifa variety?

The other nine denominations are distinct and distant minorities?

RW it seems you follow closely the contender of the will... why is it that most don't believe the contention? Is there other ill will at foot?

It seems reading about the Sunni Shi'ite split it is an old arguement more social/political than religious is this the same?

Sure, more than welcome. Often in human history the majority is wrong. Martin Luther and countless came to that conclusion about Catholicism, the Shiites about the Sunnis, vice versa, and so on. Majority in and of itself means nothing, can and has throughout history been indicative of cunning and deceit.

Speaking as a Bahai since 1976, having spent decades reading the voluminous Bahai writings and books, watching, discerning, and experiencing deeds from words, I believe the historical record clearly demonstrates Abdul-Baha had a profoundly different vision of Baha'u'llah's teachings from what has evolved under the spurious will and testament and Shoghi Effendi. All of the objections of Arthra are the typical ones of Haifan Baha'is, repeatedly by rote for decades, from Shoghi Effendi, who clearly exhibited the tell-tale cunning of the guilty when it came to Ruth White. Artha's claims are covered in my piece,

An Analysis of Abdul-Baha's 1912 Authentic Covenant
Comments on Abdul-Baha's 1912 Authentic Covenant

In terms of the Sunni/Shiite split, I believe I have read that the issues are religious as well as social and political. Ibn Khaldun, often considered the most important Muslim historians, in his Introduction to History, chronicles and argues that under Muawiya and others, the princes took over Islam, subverting it into basically a political power symbol. That's what has often been argued happened to Christianity under Constantitine. It is what has happened to the Bahai Movement under Shoghi Effendi. In Shia and Sunni, there are significant spiritual and religious nuances involved too, which is the same for Reform Bahais and the other Bahai denominations.

Again, most of the Haifan Baha'is have been completely deceived and brainwashed into believing an entirely false version of the early Bahai events during Abdul-Baha's lifetime, so that many Baha'is are well meaning but in the dark, without knowing it. The entire "covenant breaking" mentality that has been inculcated into them prevents them from seeking the truth of their own tradition. Instead, unsuspectingly, they accept the half-truths and distortions concocted by Shoghi Effendi and others who benefited monetarily and otherwise from the forged document.

Much of all this is explained in more detail and relevant documents linked to at

An Analysis of Abdul-Baha's 1912 Authentic Covenant
Comments on Abdul-Baha's 1912 Authentic Covenant

 

[radarmark]

Did some academic research on the topic of "sects within Bahaism". I judge thing pretty much by their actions (are the consequences good or bad, inclusive or exclusive).

In my opinion, looking at the actions of the Haifa /UHJ Bahais (the 95%), I find the organization (not the members) lacking.

Just my opinion (which can be changed as I continue to research this), but it really does not matter if the Covenant Will and Testament are real or forged. It is rather the fruits of the tree that I find bitter (not the fruits of Bahá'u'lláh or his writings or his beliefs as an outsider can know them).

Of course, being your classic liberal Quaker I would be put off by any central authority, any creed.

Pax et amore vincunt omnia. Radarmark

 

[Ruth White]

ditto!

So from what I can find 98% are of the Haifa variety?

The other nine denominations are distinct and distant minorities?

RW it seems you follow closely the contender of the will... why is it that most don't believe the contention? Is there other ill will at foot?

It seems reading about the Sunni Shi'ite split it is an old arguement more social/political than religious is this the same?

Sure, more than welcome. Often in human history the majority is wrong. Martin Luther and countless came to that conclusion about Catholicism, the Shiites about the Sunnis, vice versa, and so on. Majority in and of itself means nothing, can and has throughout history been indicative of cunning and deceit.

Speaking as a Bahai since 1976, having spent decades reading the voluminous Bahai writings and books, watching, discerning, and experiencing deeds from words, I believe the historical record clearly demonstrates Abdul-Baha had a profoundly different vision of Baha'u'llah's teachings from what has evolved under the spurious will and testament and Shoghi Effendi. All of the objections of Arthra are the typical ones of Haifan Baha'is, repeatedly by rote for decades, from Shoghi Effendi, who clearly exhibited the tell-tale cunning of the guilty when it came to Ruth White. Artha's claims are covered in my piece,

Google "An Analysis of Abdul-Baha's 1912 Authentic Covenant"

In terms of the Sunni/Shiite split, I believe I have read that the issues are religious as well as social and political. Ibn Khaldun, often considered the most important Muslim historians, in his Introduction to History, chronicles and argues that under Muawiya and others, the princes took over Islam, subverting it into basically a political power symbol. That's what has often been argued happened to Christianity under Constantitine. It is what has happened to the Bahai Movement under Shoghi Effendi.

Again, most of the Haifan Baha'is have been completely deceived and brainwashed into believing an entirely false version of the early Bahai events during Abdul-Baha's lifetime, so that many Baha'is are well meaning but in the dark, without knowing it. The entire "covenant breaking" mentality that has been inculcated into them prevents them from seeking the truth of their own tradition. Instead, unsuspectingly, they accept the half-truths and distortions concocted by Shoghi Effendi and others who benefited monetarily and otherwise from the forged document.

Much of all this is explained in more detail and relevant documents linked to at

Google "An Analysis of Abdul-Baha's 1912 Authentic Covenant"

 

[bob x]

This is the first time I even knew about the existence of schisms within the Baha'i movement, which I find ironic given the original intention to be a unification of all religions, but not surprising given human nature.

 

[arthra]

This is the first time I even knew about the existence of schisms within the Baha'i movement, which I find ironic given the original intention to be a unification of all religions, but not surprising given human nature.

Right.. Actually there have been attempts to divide the Baha'is from the beginning as I posted above:

"Since it's formation after 1863 there were groups that formed to oppose Baha'u'llah..in the form of the Azalis and later there was a group that opposed Abdul-Baha which was under His younger half brother Muhammad Ali...and after Shoghi Effendi the Guardian designated by Abdul-Baha there was Ruth White and others who opposed him.. Today there are people who oppose the Universal House of Justice. But for Baha'is the Faith has continued united.."

If you look back historically at most religions they often have a divisive period.. The various sects and denominations are not uncommon. For Baha'is by and large this process has not been too noticeable.

In the Baha'i perspective in my view it is the covenant that unites the believers.. A covenant where the Founder has designated Who succeeds Him..Who can interpret His teachings.

In many countries when we become Baha'is there is a Declaration that we accept "...Baha'u'llah the Promised One of God. I recognize the Bab, His (Baha'u'llah's) Forerunner and Abdul-Baha the Center of His Covenant. I request enrollment in the Baha'i community with the understanding that Baha'u'llah has established sacred principles, laws and institutions which I must obey"

So rather than a creedal statement as in some religions we have this understanding when we declare.. To me it's like a Covenant we make.

It probably takes at least a year for a new believer to be acculturated to Baha'i values in my opinion..but some may take longer or shorter.

 

[arthra]

Did some academic research on the topic of "sects within Bahaism". I judge thing pretty much by their actions (are the consequences good or bad, inclusive or exclusive).

In my opinion, looking at the actions of the Haifa /UHJ Bahais (the 95%), I find the organization (not the members) lacking.

Just my opinion (which can be changed as I continue to research this), but it really does not matter if the Covenant Will and Testament are real or forged. It is rather the fruits of the tree that I find bitter (not the fruits of Bahá'u'lláh or his writings or his beliefs as an outsider can know them).

Of course, being your classic liberal Quaker I would be put off by any central authority, any creed.

Pax et amore vincunt omnia. Radarmark

In the Baha'i Faith the "central authority" is today the Universal House of Justice..

Universal House of Justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and it is elected every five years by the National Spiritual Assemblies around the planet:

Bahá'í Faith by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Every year we elect our National Spiritual Assemblies.. and every year we elect the delegates who at Covention elect our National Spiritual Assemblies and so on.

We have our Unit Conventions coming up soon to elect delegates! There is no campaigning or electioneering permitted...no nominations are permitted and the ballot is secret!

 

[wil]

In my understanding in Christianity we have many schisms and splits....and open dialogue increases understanding, censorship of opposing thoughts just increases their power...

What we resist persists.

Seek first to understand, then to be understood.

 

[Ruth White]

ditto!

So from what I can find 98% are of the Haifa variety?

The other nine denominations are distinct and distant minorities?

RW it seems you follow closely the contender of the will... why is it that most don't believe the contention? Is there other ill will at foot?

It seems reading about the Sunni Shi'ite split it is an old arguement more social/political than religious is this the same?

Sure, more than welcome. Often in human history the majority is wrong. Martin Luther and countless came to that conclusion about Catholicism, the Shiites about the Sunnis, vice versa, and so on. Majority in and of itself means nothing, can and has throughout history been indicative of cunning and deceit.

Speaking as a Bahai since 1976, having spent decades reading the voluminous Bahai writings and books, watching, discerning, and experiencing deeds from words, I believe the historical record clearly demonstrates Abdul-Baha had a profoundly different vision of Baha'u'llah's teachings from what has evolved under the spurious will and testament and Shoghi Effendi. All of the objections of Arthra are the typical ones of Haifan Baha'is, repeatedly by rote for decades, from Shoghi Effendi, who clearly exhibited the tell-tale cunning of the guilty when it came to Ruth White. Artha's claims are covered in my piece,

An Analysis of Abdul-Baha's 1912 Authentic Covenant


In terms of the Sunni/Shiite split, I believe I have read that the issues are religious as well as social and political. Ibn Khaldun, often considered the most important Muslim historians, in his Introduction to History, chronicles and argues that under Muawiya and others, the princes took over Islam, subverting it into basically a political power symbol. That's what has often been argued happened to Christianity under Constantitine. It is what has happened to the Bahai Movement under Shoghi Effendi.

Again, most of the Haifan Baha'is have been completely deceived and brainwashed into believing an entirely false version of the early Bahai events during Abdul-Baha's lifetime, so that many Baha'is are well meaning but in the dark, without knowing it. The entire "covenant breaking" mentality that has been inculcated into them prevents them from seeking the truth of their own tradition. Instead, unsuspectingly, they accept the half-truths and distortions concocted by Shoghi Effendi and others who benefited monetarily and otherwise from the forged document.

Much of all this is explained in more detail and relevant documents linked to at

An Analysis of Abdul-Baha's 1912 Authentic Covenant

 

[Ahmad Sohrab]

ditto!

So from what I can find 98% are of the Haifa variety?

The other nine denominations are distinct and distant minorities?

RW it seems you follow closely the contender of the will... why is it that most don't believe the contention? Is there other ill will at foot?

It seems reading about the Sunni Shi'ite split it is an old arguement more social/political than religious is this the same?

Sure, more than welcome. Often in human history the majority is wrong. Martin Luther and countless came to that conclusion about Catholicism, the Shiites about the Sunnis, vice versa, and so on. Majority in and of itself means nothing, can and has throughout history been indicative of cunning and deceit.

Speaking as a Bahai since 1976, having spent decades reading the voluminous Bahai writings and books, watching, discerning, and experiencing deeds from words, I believe the historical record clearly demonstrates Abdul-Baha had a profoundly different vision of Baha'u'llah's teachings from what has evolved under the spurious will and testament and Shoghi Effendi. All of the objections of Arthra are the typical ones of Haifan Baha'is, repeatedly by rote for decades, from Shoghi Effendi, who clearly exhibited the tell-tale cunning of the guilty when it came to Ruth White. Artha's claims are covered in my piece,

Google "An Analysis of Abdul-Baha's 1912 Authentic Covenant"

In terms of the Sunni/Shiite split, I believe I have read that the issues are religious as well as social and political. Ibn Khaldun, often considered the most important Muslim historians, in his Introduction to History, chronicles and argues that under Muawiya and others, the princes took over Islam, subverting it into basically a political power symbol. That's what has often been argued happened to Christianity under Constantitine. It is what has happened to the Bahai Movement under Shoghi Effendi.

Again, most of the Haifan Baha'is have been completely deceived and brainwashed into believing an entirely false version of the early Bahai events during Abdul-Baha's lifetime, so that many Baha'is are well meaning but in the dark, without knowing it. The entire "covenant breaking" mentality that has been inculcated into them prevents them from seeking the truth of their own tradition. Instead, unsuspectingly, they accept the half-truths and distortions concocted by Shoghi Effendi and others who benefited monetarily and otherwise from the forged document.

Much of all this is explained in more detail and relevant documents linked to at

Google "An Analysis of Abdul-Baha's 1912 Authentic Covenant"

 

[arthra]

In my understanding in Christianity we have many schisms and splits....and open dialogue increases understanding, censorship of opposing thoughts just increases their power...

What we resist persists.

Seek first to understand, then to be understood.

Certainly when you look back over the history of Christianity there has been censorship and conflict and so many schisms.

Even in our Baha'i marriages all the parents of the prospective spouses must agree and freely consent to the marriage. Polarizing camps and animosity are not acceptable for us.

So I think we Baha'is make an extra effort to seek areas of agreement first and this process is simply called by us "consultation" but there is an actual process for it and here is how our Assemblies consult on matters of importance:

The prime requisites for them that take counsel together are purity of motive, radiance of spirit, detachment from all else save God, attraction to His Divine Fragrances, humility and lowliness amongst His loved ones, patience and long-suffering in difficulties and servitude to His exalted Threshold. Should they be graciously aided to acquire these attributes, victory from the unseen Kingdom of Bahá shall be vouchsafed to them....

The members thereof must take counsel together in such wise that no occasion for ill-feeling or discord may arise. This can be attained when every member expresseth with absolute freedom his own opinion and setteth forth his argument.

Should any one oppose, he must on no account feel hurt for not until matters are fully discussed can the right way be revealed.

The shining spark of truth cometh forth only after the clash of differing opinions. If after discussion, a decision be carried unanimously, well and good; but if the Lord forbid, differences of opinion should arise, a majority of voices must prevail. [SIZE=-1]

(`Abdu'l-Bahá, cited in a letter dated 5 March 1922 written by Shoghi Effendi to the Bahá'ís of the United States and Canada, published in "Bahá'í Administration: Selected Messages 1922-1932", p. 21-22)
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]
Even where it pertains to family matters:[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE]Regarding thy question about consultation of a father with his son, or a son with his father, in matters of trade and commerce, consultation is one of the fundamental elements of the foundation of the Law of God. Such consultation is assuredly acceptable, whether between father and son, or with others. There is nothing better than this. Man must consult in all things for this will lead him to the depths of each problem and enable him to find the right solution.

[SIZE=-1](`Abdu'l-Bahá, from a Tablet - translated from the Persian)[/SIZE]