Baha'is and politics

[Popeyesays]

Scott, I'm well aware that imprisonment is always available as one of the options.

Regards,

Bruce

I know that Bruce, but we were discussing whether or not imprisonment could equal atonement as execution appears to do.

Regards.
Scott

 

[Popeyesays]

Steven, remember that you can always use:

http://www.ibiblio.org/Bahai/TrueSeeker

for online access!

(It may well not have Taherzadeh, though.)

Bruce

Unfortunately, it does not have Taherzadeh, nor much else that is available on Ocean.

Steven, if you have a Linux operating system, it might run. SOme OS's can emulate windows sufficiently to run Ocean, I'm sure - it might be alittle glitchy, though.

Ocean is so comprehensive it might even be worth buying an older Pentium III to have it available, such computers are relatively cheap these days.

Regards,
Scott

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings, Scott and Brian!

I know that Bruce, but we were discussing whether or not imprisonment could equal atonement as execution appears to do.

I'm not in a position to say definitely one way or the other whether it would or not, but my point is that 'Abdu'l-Baha specifically said that the death penalty does provide full payment. (This, to me, implicitly indicates that it is different in this respect from imprisonment, at least in degree if not in kind. To my knowledge he made no equivalent statement about imprisonment; if you know of one, please post it.)

This is the direct quote of the passage in question:

#152
"As to the question regarding the soul of a murderer, and what his punishment would be. The answer given was that the murderer must expiate his crime: that is, if they put the murderer to death, his death is his atonement for his crime; and following the death, God in His justice will impose no second penalty upon him, for divine justice would not allow this."

Selections from the Writings of `Abdu'l-Bahá, page 179

Peace,

Bruce

 

[Popeyesays]

Greetings, Scott and Brian!



I'm not in a position to say definitely one way or the other whether it would or not, but my point is that 'Abdu'l-Baha specifically said that the death penalty does provide full payment. (This, to me, implicitly indicates that it is different in this respect from imprisonment, at least in degree if not in kind. To my knowledge he made no equivalent statement about imprisonment; if you know of one, please post it.)

This is the direct quote of the passage in question:

#152
"As to the question regarding the soul of a murderer, and what his punishment would be. The answer given was that the murderer must expiate his crime: that is, if they put the murderer to death, his death is his atonement for his crime; and following the death, God in His justice will impose no second penalty upon him, for divine justice would not allow this."

Selections from the Writings of `Abdu'l-Bahá, page 179

Peace,

Bruce

okay, I'll post it again, pat particular attention to the Taherzadeh quote which quotes an otherwise untranslated tablet.

"Not so specifically, but try these:
"For just as the effects and the fruitage of the uterine life are not to be found in that dark and narrow place, and only when the child is transferred to this wide earth do the benefits and uses of growth and development in that previous world become revealed -- so likewise reward and punishment, heaven and hell, requital and retribution for actions done in this present life, will stand revealed in that other world beyond. And just as, if human life in the womb were limited to that uterine world, existence there would be nonsensical, irrelevant -- so too if the life of this world, the deeds here done and their fruitage, did not come forth in the world beyond, the whole process would be irrational and foolish."
(Abdu'l-Baha, Selections from the Writings of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 185)

"From a careful study of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh one may reach the surprising conclusion that just punishments in general, and those ordained in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas in particular, are a mercy of God to man, and a token of His loving-kindness to him. Bahá'u'lláh in one of His Tablets(20) reveals some of the mysteries of this life and the next, describes how everything in this mortal world has counterparts in the spiritual worlds, and explains that the individual's deeds in this life will affect his 297 existence in the next. To illustrate the benefits which will accrue to the soul, if he is punished in this world for his misdeeds, He uses the example of a man who steals a seed of a tree from someone in the spring season. If he returns it to its owner in that same season, he has cleared his debt and does not owe him anything else. But if he fails to give it back in the spring, what does he owe him in the summer? He owes him a tree and its fruits, because to give back the seed in the summer is useless. This analogy explains that if the individual pays for his misdeeds in this life by receiving the punishment which is ordained in the Holy Writings, his burden of sin will be far lighter in the next life. Otherwise, who knows how heavily his soul will have to pay if he somehow avoids punishment in this world."
(Adib Taherzadeh, The Revelation of Baha'u'llah v 3, p. 296)"

This is how we got Steven asking for where I found Taherzadeh in electronic format.

Now, this requires personal interpretation, and you are free to disagree with me as much as you like.

Regards,
Scott

 

[BruceDLimber]

Hi.

Very simply, I see no contradiction between the two. And while I fully agree that our actions here determine our status then, there is still little direct cause-and-effect other than the passage I quoted. So as far as I can tell this simply isn't something we can determine fully here and now.

Nor do I think there is necessarily any "disagreement" needing reconciliation. I'm perfectly happy to live with the remaining ambiguities for the nonce....

Regards,

Bruce

 

[Popeyesays]

Hi.

Very simply, I see no contradiction between the two. And while I fully agree that our actions here determine our status then, there is still little direct cause-and-effect other than the passage I quoted. So as far as I can tell this simply isn't something we can determine fully here and now.

Nor do I think there is necessarily any "disagreement" needing reconciliation. I'm perfectly happy to live with the remaining ambiguities for the nonce....

Regards,

Bruce

So am I, Bruce. This life is full of education, and the next must be even fuller.

Regards,
Scott

 

[arthra]

Using the word "nonce":

Bruce...

I think the word "nonce" must be one of those fifty dollars words that you use every once in awhile. I mean you could find use it maybe for a special occasion here at CR or other places. Where else have you used it?

- Art

 

[Popeyesays]

Re: Using the word "nonce":

Bruce...

I think the word "nonce" must be one of those fifty dollars words that you use every once in awhile. I mean you could find use it maybe for a special occasion here at CR or other places. Where else have you used it?

- Art

Well,
I use "nonce" fairly often in thesame usage as Bruce, so I knew what it meant.
Main Entry: 1nonce
Pronunciation: 'nän(t)s
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English nanes, alteration (from misdivision of then anes in such phrases as to then anes for the one purpose) of anes one purpose, irregular from an, on one -- more at [size=-1]ONE[/size]
1 : the one, particular, or present occasion, purpose, or use <for the nonce>
2 : the time being

My grandmother used it frequently, she was of Ulster Irish descent.

Regards,
Scott

 

[BruceDLimber]

Re: Using the word "nonce":

I think the word "nonce" must be one of those fifty dollars words that you use every once in awhile. I mean you could find use it maybe for a special occasion here at CR or other places. Where else have you used it?

Hmmm; I hadn't realized it was all that expensive a word! . . .

Anyway, in the immoral words of Allan Sherman's uncle,

"Who counts?!"



Bruce