Transsexuality

Memorandum

To: The Universal House of Justice

Date: 26 December 2002

From: Research Department

Transsexuality

The Research Department has studied the questions concerning the Bahá’í perspective on the “medical and social treatments of transsexual people” raised by Mr. ... in his email message of 7 November 2002 to the Universal House of Justice. We provide the following response.

As to the Bahá’í view of transsexuality and sex-change operations, the extract from a letter dated 31 August 1983, written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice, cited below, sets out the following guidance:

“The House of Justice has not found any text in the Bahá’í writings which deals explicitly with the subjects of transsexuality or surgical operations carried out to change sex or to establish a single sex. It has decided that changes of sex or attempts to change sex should, at the present time, be considered medical questions on which advice and guidance should be sought from experts in that field.”

Mr. ... is doubtless aware that the issue of transsexuality and the question of determining the circumstances under which sex-change operations should be undertaken are very complex. There is a wide range of gender identity disorders of which transsexuality is one of the most extreme. In addition, international standards of care have been established for gender identity disorders. These include psychotherapy, hormone treatment and surgical therapy, which are frequently offered sequentially to the individual concerned. The specific treatment regimen, necessarily, depends on the diagnosis and decision of the medical experts involved.

With regard to the specific questions raised by Mr. ... we attach for his interest a short compilation of extracts from letters written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice in response to questions concerning the subjects of transsexuality and sex-change operations.

The Original Text of the Súriy-i-Haykal

Memorandum

From: Research Department

To: The Universal House of Justice

Date: 29 September 2002

The Original Text of the Súriy-i-Haykal

The Research Department has been asked by the Universal House of Justice to provide a summary of the considerations that led to its choice of the manuscript which served as the basis for the translation of the Súriy-i-Haykal.

The question of the authenticity of the numerous transcribed copies of the Súriy-i-Haykal held in the Bahá’í World Centre Archives, as well as of the various printed editions, was the subject of detailed study by the Research Department during the preparation of ‘The Summons of the Lord of Hosts’. Its manuscript history can be summarized as follows: Originally revealed in Adrianople, the Súriy-i-Haykal in its initial form had limited circulation and was addressed principally to members of the Bábí community who had not yet recognized Bahá’u’lláh. Soon after the arrival of the exiles in ‘Akká it was recast in scope and content and expanded to include five of Bahá’u’lláh’s principal messages to individual kings and rulers. This early ‘Akká-period text, which can be regarded for all intents and purposes as a separately revealed work, was later revised in the Holy Land, at Bahá’u’lláh’s initiative, in preparation for its publication in Bombay in 1308 A.H. (1890-91) as the first and longest Tablet of the Kitab-i-Mubin. The bulk of these final revisions are primarily stylistic in nature, although in a few cases, such as in paragraph 80 of the translation of the Súriy-i-Haykal, the changes are more substantial.

The Research Department’s conclusion that the final revisions were undertaken with Bahá’u’lláh’s approval is based primarily on the existence of three manuscripts held in the Bahá'í World Centre Archives which corroborate the reading of the Súriy-i-Haykal in the Kitáb-i-Mubín. The first, which was donated to the Archives in 1990, is in the hand of Zaynu’l- Muqarrabin and is dated 30 Jamádíyu'th-Thání 1307 (21 February 1890). The other two are undated draft copies, both in the hand of Mírzá Áqá Ján and also held in the Archives. These three manuscripts match closely the reading of the Bombay Kitáb-i-Mubín, including the revised wording of paragraph 80:

‘Alíyu’lláhí and Nusayrí Sects and the Infallibility of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá

Memorandum

To: The Universal House of Justice

Date: 6 March 2002

From: Research Department

‘Alíyu’lláhí and Nusayrí Sects and the Infallibility of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá

The Research Department has studied the questions raised by Mr. ... in his email message of 16 October 2001 to the Universal House of Justice. He states that in chapter nine of H. M. Balyuzi’s ‘The Báb: The Herald of the Day of Days’, "Mr. Balyuzi establishes that the guards who escorted the Báb from Isfahán to the northern region of Iran were members of the ‘Alíyu’lláhí sect". Mr. ... points out that Mr. Balyuzi indicates that in ‘A Travellers Narrative ‘Abdu’l-Bahá "affirms that those who escorted the Báb were followers of the Nusayrí sect". Mr. ... writes that, "Although Mr. Balyuzi highlights the similarity between these two sects..., as far as beliefs are concerned”, the two sects are very different from one another. He asks, “If Abdu’l-Bahá’s infallibilities include the power to know of far-off or remote historical events such as, for example, His affirmation that Helena, mother of Constantine, knew the actual resting place of Jesus Christ's mortal remains, then would it not be more appropriate to omit other historical references in favor of Abdu’l-Bahá’s assertion of the identity of the horsemen who escorted the Báb?"

Mr. ... further asks, "If it were the case that ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s infallibility is relative as concerns historiographical knowledge, then in which aspects is it for certain? Is the infallibility conferred on Abdul-Bahá (al-'isma al-Sifátiyya) comparable in its scope to that of the Guardian of the Faith?" We provide the following response.

1. ‘Alíyu'lláhí and Nusayri sects

The sources that Mr. ... referred to were perused. We provide both references below. On page 11 of A Traveller's Narrative, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá writes:

“A period of four months passed in this fashion, and the Mu'tamid passed away to the mercy of God. Gurgín Khán, the Mu'tamid's nephew, was aware of the Báb's being in the private apartments, and represented the matter to the Prime Minister. Hájí Mírzá Áqásí, that celebrated minister, issued a decisive command and gave instructions that they should send the Báb secretly in disguise under the escort of Nusayrí horsemen to the capital.”

The passage on page 118 of ‘The Báb: The Herald of the Day of Days’ reads as follows:

“Following the instructions of Muhammad Sháh, Gurgín Khán gave the custody of the Báb to Muhammad Big-i-Chápárchí (the chief courier). Muhammad Big belonged to the sect of Ahl-i-Haqq (the People of Truth), commonly known as the ‘Alíyu’lláhí, who have had a long tradition of tolerance, liberalism and rectitude. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá states in ‘A Traveller ‘s Narrative’ that the guards who escorted the Báb, on this journey to the north, were Nusayrí horsemen. Nusayrís and ‘Alíyu’lláhís are almost identical.

Prayer of the Báb, Jungle Story, Statement Concerning Persepolis, Psychic Powers

Memorandum

To: The Universal House of Justice

From: Research Department

Date: 6 August 2007

Prayer of the Báb, Jungle Story, Statement Concerning Persepolis, Psychic Powers

At the instruction of the Universal House of Justice, the Research Department has studied the questions on the above-mentioned subjects posed by Mr.--              in his email letters of 13, 18 and 23 May 2007 received at the Bahá’í World Centre. We provide the following response.

Prayer of the Báb

Mr. refers to Velda Piff Metelmann’s book entitled Lua Getsinger, Herald of the Covenant (Oxford: George Ronald, 1997). He indicates that in this book, it is stated that "Lua used to say a certain prayer that the Báb had given to Táhirih." Mr.-- wishes to know which particular prayer Lua used. From a preliminary perusal of Mrs. Metelmann’s book, the Research Department has located several brief references to Táhirih on pages 55 and 56, page 189, and pages 277 and 278, none, however, relate specifically to Lua's recitation of a prayer by the Báb. If Mr.-- could provide the precise page reference, it might be possible for the Department to undertake an additional search.

Story about a person in a jungle

With regard to the enquiry about "a story about someone trying to get out of a jungle, but repeatedly being put back by a hand to the middle of the jungle, unable to reach the city", the Research Department has found no information about this subject in the authoritative Writings of the Faith.

Statement concerning Persepolis

Letters written on behalf of the Guardian

Memorandum

To: The Universal House of Justice

Date: 12 January 2006

From: Research Department

Letters written on Behalf of the Guardian

In an email letter of 23 July 2005 addressed to the Universal House of Justice, Mr. _ poses a number of questions concerning the degree of authority to be accorded to the letters written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi and to the memoranda prepared by the Research Department, and he enquires whether all statements in the Writings should be accepted as being "based in fact, unless explicitly stated as being conditioned on other information.” The Research Department has studied the issues raised by Mr. and we offer the following comments.

Reference is made to statements on the Internet which apparently infer that the Guardian discontinued the practice of reviewing all letters written on his behalf when the amount of correspondence increased. Mr. _ seeks confirmation of the fact that Shoghi Effendi continued to review all letters written on his behalf until the end of his life. The Research Department sets out below the only information it has, to date, been able to locate on this subject.

In a postscript appended to a letter dated 7 December 1930, written on his behalf to an individual believer, Shoghi Effendi described the normal procedure he followed in dealing with correspondence written on his behalf:

“I wish to add and say that whatever letters are sent in my behalf from Haifa are all read and approved by me before mailing. There is no exception whatever to this rule.”

Given the Guardian’s categorical assertion, it follows that any “exception” to "this rule" would require his explicit permission. For example, in the latter years of his ministry, Shoghi Effendi assigned to the Hand of the Cause Leroy Ioas the special responsibility for monitoring the progress of the goals of the Ten Year Crusade. In implementing this specific function, Mr. Ioas worked under the close supervision of the Guardian; however, not all of his letters — for example, those simply requesting information about the goals — were viewed by Shoghi Effendi before being transmitted.

Repetition of the Greatest Name Ninety-five Times a Day

Memorandum

To: The Universal House of Justice       

Date: 15 September 2003

From: Research Department

Additional References Regarding Repetition of the Greatest Name Ninety-five Times a Day

The Research Department has studied the query raised by Dr. ... in his email message of 14 May 2003 to the Bahá’í World Centre. Dr. ... explains that he has conducted a preliminary search of the Bahá’í Sacred Writings and other references on the subject of the repetition of the Greatest Name ninety-five times a day. He appends a list of citations he has located, and explains that he has not found any additional insights or commentaries on “the law that brings ‘spiritual enrichment’ to our souls ‘by this simple act of worshipful meditation’”. He asks whether any additional references or materials are available on this law. We provide the following response.

Dr. ... is no doubt aware from a perusal of the Synopsis and Codification section of the “Kitáb-i-Aqdas”, that the “Repetition of the Greatest Name 95 times a day” is listed as one of the “Miscellaneous Laws and Ordinances”.

He has already referred to paragraph 18 in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, a segment of which reads:

“It hath been ordained that every believer in God, the Lord of Judgement, shall, each day, having washed his hands and then his face, seat himself and, turning unto God, repeat “Alláh-u-Abhá” ninety-five times.”

We bring to Dr. ...’s attention note 33 of “The Kitáb-i-Aqdas”, which refers to paragraph 18 and provides the following elucidation regarding the significance of the Greatest Name in relation to Bahá’u’lláh:

““Alláh-u-Abhá” is an Arabic Phrase meaning “God the All Glorious.” It is a form of the Greatest Name of God.... In Islám there is a tradition that among the many names of God, one was the greatest; however, the identity of this Greatest Name was hidden. Bahá’u’lláh has confirmed that the Greatest Name is “Bahá”.”

Definition of the word "ungodly"

Memorandum

To: The Universal House of Justice

Date: 10 September 2001

From: Research Department

Definition of the word "ungodly"

In their letter dated 1 June 2001 to the Universal House of Justice, Miss … and Miss … enquire about the meaning of the word "ungodly" as it is used in the following passage from the Hidden Words, and more generally in the Bahá'í Writings:

“O Son of Dust! Beware! Walk not with the ungodly and seek not fellowship with him, for such companionship turneth the radiance of the heart into infernal fire.”[1]

Specifically, Miss … and Miss … seek clarification concerning "who and what is considered ‘ungodly'". The Research Department has studied these issues, and we provide the following comments.

By way of introduction, we wish to note that the Research Department has not, to date, been able to locate in the Writings of the Faith either an authoritative interpretation of the verse cited above, or a detailed definition of the Bahá'í concept of "ungodliness". We note, however, that Bahá'u'lláh appears to link the decline of religion to the rise in the influence of the "ungodly". He states, for example:

“Religion is verily the chief instrument for the establishment of order in the world and of tranquillity amongst its peoples. The weakening of the pillars of religion hath strengthened the foolish and emboldened them and made them more arrogant. Verily I say: The greater the decline of religion, the more grievous the waywardness of the ungodly. This cannot but lead in the end to chaos and confusion”.[2]

Questions about possible misprints in published extracts from letters of Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice

Memorandum

To: The Universal House of Justice

Date: 17 June 2001

From: Research Department

Questions about possible misprints in published extracts from letters of Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice

The Research Department has studied the questions raised by Mr. --- in two electronic mail messages, both dated 19 February 2001, addressed to the Universal House of Justice. Specifically, he enquires about the accuracy of certain words that appear in Bahá'í publications. We provide the following comment.

"Directive" or "Direction"?

Mr. --- cites the following passage from a letter dated 12 November 1973 from the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of Australia, (1) which is published in Lights of Guidance, A Bahá'í Reference File:(2)

"We urge you ever to bear in mind that the purpose of Bahá'í administration is primarily to lend strength and directive (3) to the teaching work and to promote the establishment of the Faith. It should never be regarded as an end in itself but purely as a means to canalize and make effective a spiritual vitality generated by the Word of God in the hearts of the believers."

Mr. --- expresses the view that the word "directive" appears to be out of place. He wonders whether it might be a misprint for the word "direction".

From a study of the issue it is apparent that a typographical error was introduced. The correct word is "direction", as Mr. --- suggests.

"Just" or "First"?

Reference is made to several Bahá'í publications, including the compilation on The Local Spiritual Assembly, Lights of Guidance and Developing Distinctive Bahá'í Communities,(4) all of which quote the following passage from a letter dated 14 October 1941, written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to a Bahá'í couple:

Reference by Baha’u’llah to “Two great powers" in the Tablet of Maqsúd

Memorandum

To: The Universal House of Justice

From: Research Department

Date: 1 May 2001

Lawh-i-Maqsúd

The Research Department has studied the questions about the Lawh-i-Maqsúd [1] raised by Mr. ... in his email message of 7 February 2001 to the Universal House of Justice. Specifically, he enquires about the date of the revelation of the Tablet of Maqsúd and he seeks information about the "Two great powers"[2] referred to in this Tablet. We provide the following response.

Date of Revelation of the Tablet

The Lawh-i-Maqsúd was revealed by Bahá'u'lláh in the prison-city of 'Akká on the 29th of Safar 1299 A.H. (January 20 1882).

"Two great powers"

Mr. ... requests information about the "Two great powers", mentioned in the following passage from the Tablet of Maqsúd, that appears on page 170 of Tablets of Bahá'u'lláh revealed after the Kitáb-i-Aqdas.

Two great powers who regard themselves as the founders and leaders of civilization and the framers of constitutions have risen up against the followers of the Faith associated with Him who conversed with God.[3]

The Research Department has not, to date, been able to locate any references in the Bahá'í Writings that explain the identity of the two countries that arose against the followers of Moses. However, from a perusal of European history in the second part of the 19th century, it is suggested that the two powers referred to by Bahá'u'lláh in the Lawh-i-Maqsúd as being persecutors of the Jews would appear to be France and Russia. The world powers of the 1880s were Britain, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary and Russia. The Encyclopedia Judaica indicates that the Jews were officially emancipated in Germany during the latter half of the 19th century, and although there was some anti-semitic activity in Austria, it was officially opposed by the government. In France, however, between 1881 and 1894, there was a rise of anti-Jewish publicity and agitation, the founding of the National Anti-Semitic League in 1889, and the demand in 1891 by 32 French deputies (members of parliament) that Jews be expelled from France, culminated in the infamous Dreyfus Affair of 1894. In Russia, the assassination of Alexander II led to pogroms, leading to the so-called "May laws" of 1882 which prohibited Jews from living in villages and in 1886 to the limitation of the number of Jews allowed into University. Discrimination was continued officially until 1918. There was no official anti-semitism in Britain.

Notes:

1 Published in Tablets of Bahá'u'lláh revealed after the Kitáb-i-Aqdas (Wilmette: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1997), pages 159-178.

2 Ibid., page 170.

3 Moses

(Baha’i Library Online)