Preferred English Translation of the Bible to quote from

Memorandum

3 November 1996 

To: The Universal House of Justice

From: Research Department

In an email message of 23 September 1996 to the Universal House of Justice, Mr. ... requests clarification on "the principles that govern quoting from the Bible in English-language Bahá'í publications". He explains that he has heard an unsubstantiated view that only the King James version of the Bible may be used and observes that "this individual seems to give the King James version an authority greater than that of the original text in matters of interpretation". His queries were referred to the Research Department for study and the following is our response.

We have been unable to find guidance in the Writings which refers directly to quoting from the Bible in English-language Bahá'í publications. It may be helpful to ... to note, however, that, in an incoming letter dated 2 September 1949 to the Guardian, an English-speaking believer asked the following question:

Quite recently, the writer, in guiding at the Temple has been asked just what version of the Bible Bahá'ís use. May we have your directive on this, please?

The Guardian's response appears in a letter written on his behalf, where we read:

“Shoghi Effendi himself uses the King James version of the Bible, both because it is an authoritative one and in beautiful English.” (28 October 1949 to an individual believer; published in "Bahá'í News", no. 228, February 1950, p. 4).

Compilation of Extracts Regarding Arius

Memorandum

 To: The Universal House of Justice

July 9, 1996

From: Research Department

A brief compilation of extracts from the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Baha concerning Arius

Station of Arius

In his email of 15 May 1996 to the Universal House of Justice, Mr. X refers to statements from the Tablets by ‘Abdu’l-Baha in Star of the West, vol. 10, no. 5, concerning Arius and the violation of the Covenant of Christ. He explains that when these statements were posted on a BBS inter-religious discussion, it resulted in a degree of controversy:

The conservative Christians in the discussion area with whom we... and other religionists communicate have taken a surprising interest in this mention of Arius. As they put it Arius’ view “should” be like what Baha’is claim, as they see it, about the station of the Manifestation.

Mr. X believes that this interest in the Baha’i view of Arius might well provide an opportunity for him to set out, more explicitly, the Baha’i perspective on the stations of Christ and of the Manifestations of God. He, therefore, seeks other references concerning Arius and the Covenant of Christ. And, he raises the following specific questions:

...is it what Arius claimed about the station and nature of Christ that is the basis of his standing in Abdu’l-Baha’s estimation as an enemy of Christ’s Covenant or was it some other factor of Arius’ claims or behavior? Would it be proper to speak of Arius as a Covenant-Breaker? Are his works and point of view under similar censure as Covenant-Breakers of the Baha’i Faith?

Date of Revelation of Tablet of Ishraqát

Memorandum

To: The Universal House of Justice

Date: 2 April 1996

From: Research Department

In an email message of 9 February 1996, Mr. --- asks about the date on which the Tablet of Ishraqat, specifically the Eighth Ishraq, was revealed. He observes that none of the sources available to him in English provide a date, and that unless the date was recorded by the amanuenses, it is his assumption that "a dating would have to be based on correlating internal indications with historical events". To this end, Mr. --- cites a number of passages from the Tablet of Ishraqat containing allusions to historical events and he requests the assistance of the Research Department in investigating this matter.[1] We offer the following information based on our study of the resources available at the Bahá'í World Centre:

- In a Tablet of some 40 pages addressed to Varqa, which appears to have been revealed over a period of more than a month and which bears on its final page the date 19 Muharram 1303 A.H. (29 October 1885), Bahá'u'lláh informs Varqa that on 9 Dhi Qa'dih 1302 (21 August 1885), a very long Tablet has been revealed for Jalil-i-Khu'i on the Most Great Infallibility. This date actually forms part of the text of the Tablet to Varqa. Since the Most Great Infallibility is a theme discussed at great length in the Tablet of Ishraqat, it seems likely that it is to this Tablet that Bahá'u'lláh is referring.

The Tablet to Varqa has not, to date, been published, nor translated into English.

- 1885 as the date of the revelation of the Tablet of Ishraqat would appear to receive some additional support from the fact that Bahá'u'lláh, in a Tablet revealed on 24 Safar 1304 A.H. (22 November 1886), employs a sentence that is also found in the Ishraqat. [2] The sentence is as follows:

Authenticity of "Bahá'í World Faith" and "Foundations of World Unity"

Memorandum

 To: The Universal House of Justice

Date: 28 March 1996

From: Research Department

Mr. ... in an email message dated 19 February 1996, asks for information about the authenticity of the words of ‘Abdu'l-Bahá published in the above-mentioned books. Specifically, he wants to know about the section entitled "Knowledge and Deeds", found on pages 382-383 of "Bahá'í World Faith". He also asks about the status of the talks found in "The Promulgation of Universal Peace", and in "Paris Talks" and " ‘Abdu'l-Bahá in London". We provide the following response.

The specific Tablet Mr. ... asks about, as noted in the Appendix of "Bahá'í World Faith", was originally published in "Tablets of Abdul-Baha Abbas", vol. 3 (Chicago: Bahá'í Publishing Committee, 1930 printing), p. 549. The Tablet has been recently retranslated for inclusion in a forthcoming publication. We provide below the revised translation:

“Pleasing and acceptable as is a righteous person before God's Holy Threshold, yet good works should proceed from knowledge. However matchless and exquisite may be a blind man's handiwork, yet he himself is deprived of seeing it. How sorely do certain animals labour on man's behalf, what loads they bear for him, how greatly they contribute to his ease and comfort; and yet, because they are unwitting, they earn no recompense for all their pains. The clouds rain down their bounty, nurturing the plants and flowers, and imparting verdure and enchantment to the plain and prairie, the forest and the garden; but yet, unconscious as they are of the results and fruit of their outpourings, they win no praise or honour, nor earn the gratitude and approbation of any man. The lamp imparteth light, but as it hath no consciousness of doing so, no one is indebted to it. This apart, a man of righteous deeds and goodly conduct will assuredly turn towards the Light, in whichever quarter he behold it. The point is this, that faith compriseth both knowledge and the performance of good works.”

Socrates in History and the Bahá'í Writings

Memorandum

(Extract from a Memorandum Prepared by the Research Department at the instruction of the Universal House of Justice, 22 October 1995)

1. Socrates

1.1 Bahá'í Perspective

To provide a background for considering ...'s question about whether the Universal House of Justice can confirm the statements in the Bahá'í Writings about Socrates, we attach a compilation of all the available extracts in the English language which pertain to Socrates [see below] and which also serve to highlight some of the difficulties inherent in endeavouring to unravel the historical Socrates. From a study of the excerpts in this compilation, we call attention to the following points:

The Bahá'í Writings assert that the Greek philosophers were influenced by religion, that they had contact with Hebrew sages.

With the flowering of the reign of Solomon, the Greek philosophers journeyed to Jerusalem to learn from the sages and to acquire an understanding of Israelite law. See, for example, [6] and [8].

The Bahá'í Teachings indicate that Socrates travelled to Palestine and Syria [4] [5] and, more generally, to the Holy Land [8] [9].

The information about Socrates is derived from what "is recorded in eastern histories". It includes "many facts which are not included in Jewish history" [4].

The histories of the times before Alexander the Great tend to be very confused and unreliable, and even when the field of history "became an orderly and systematized discipline", the problem of giving precise dates for events in the remote past remained a difficulty [2] [15] [16].

In relation to the Tablet of Wisdom, the Universal House of Justice states that, while Bahá'u'lláh is quoting "the historical accounts familiar to the person He is addressing in the Tablet ... for the sake of illustrating the spiritual principles that He wishes to convey", this "does not necessarily mean that He is endorsing their historical accuracy" [16]. (1)