Quote from Bahaullah

[Popeyesays]

"I've read through the thread and hadn't seen any comment about the angle on this comment - the law of the Baha'i Faith is not to be implemented by individuals. This isn't about revenge. Such laws would be administered through institutions. Individuals are in fact to be as forgiving as you hint - there are many statements about how forgiving individuals are supposed to be - but also to note that society cannot run on the forgiveness of individuals. There must also be justice."

Individuals can only deal in vengeance and forgiveness.

Society must deal with justice and punishment.

The victim of a drivby shooting might practice vengeance by shooting one of his attackers, but he can never practice justice bydoing so.

Society has a greater burden.

Regards,
Scott

[Postmaster]

That phase Bahaullah wrote about burning someone for justice gives the UHJ justification to implement it.

My point is regardless for what reason to suggest such punishment, I think it was irresponsible regarding the nature of his works.

The New Testament only suggests punishments that occur in the afterlife. And people are still disturbed with that.

[Popeyesays]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

That phase Bahaullah wrote about burning someone for justice gives the UHJ justification to implement it.

My point is regardless for what reason to suggest such punishment, I think it was irresponsible regarding the nature of his works.

The New Testament only suggests punishments that occur in the afterlife. And people are still disturbed with that.

Baha`u'llah assumes the House of Justice will act responsibly. The reason for equating the punishment of death and life imprisonment is to allow the courts to act responsibly. In no case is the death sentence mandatory, it is always mitigated with the phrase (or life in prisonment).

From the Christian viewpoint the death sentence comes into play under the guidelines of "rendering unto Caesar".

Regards,
Scott

[Postmaster]

Originally Posted by Popeyesays

From the Christian viewpoint the death sentence comes into play under the guidelines of "rendering unto Caesar".

Regards,
Scott

In much the same way Bahaullah tells people to follow the laws of the land?

Rendering on to Caesar could mean a whole range of duties, from paying Tax, going to War, but to assume it means taking a punishment gracefully I'm not too sure.

[smkolins]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

That phase Bahaullah wrote about burning someone for justice gives the UHJ justification to implement it.

Certainly - that was my point. You objected to it earlier on the basis of a kind of turn the other cheek approach. My point is that for the individual that very much is the standard we are to seek. But institutionally there is a preservation of society that is needed.

Originally Posted by Postmaster

My point is regardless for what reason to suggest such punishment, I think it was irresponsible regarding the nature of his works.

Whose works?

Define irresponsible - in the case of both Baha'u'llah and 'Abdul-Baha the claim is that their decisions are the guidance of God. How were they irresponsible?

There is also understanding of degree in the matter.

I found an extended discussion on the whole matter here.

The New Testament only suggests punishments that occur in the afterlife. And people are still disturbed with that.

"Only"?! It implies eternal punishment and estrangement from God or at least that is the stance most Christians take.

[Postmaster]

Right right, I think I'm grasping the view now Smoklins, as to before I didn't I admit. What Bahaullah actually ment was that if one burns something then by some karamatic justified balance of the universe they have made themselves susceptible to the same crime?

[Popeyesays]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

In much the same way Bahaullah tells people to follow the laws of the land?

Rendering on to Caesar could mean a whole range of duties, from paying Tax, going to War, but to assume it means taking a punishment gracefully I'm not too sure.

Not in this instance 'taking' a punishment, but society 'giving' the punishment. The criminal by his own act places himself under the authority of the law.

. O SON OF SPIRIT!
The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes.
(Baha'u'llah, The Arabic Hidden Words)

This puts a new light on responsibility to society.

Regards,
Scott

[Postmaster]

What also disturbs me is "If a man were falsely condemned to die, can we not believe Almighty God would compensate him a thousandfold, in the next world, for this human injustice?"

In England where I live capital punishment is illegal, I have grown up to believe the American penal system is wrong. It goes to show for me that a society can take a different approach to criminals and that prescribing death or burning even as an option is wrong. The time Bahaullah wrote it, it might have been valid but I will use the progressive truth card against Bahaullah on this issue. Also to me it shows people do not need guidance on this issue. As we know the Koran is full with social laws and punishments, whereas the bible isn't.

[BruceDLimber]

Hi, Peter!

Originally Posted by Postmaster

Rendering on to Caesar could mean a whole range of duties, from paying Tax, going to War, but to assume it means taking a punishment gracefully I'm not too sure.

Then I refer you back to what I said in post 24 about the interesting fact that in some cases it may well be to the offender's advantage to request such punishment!

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts about this.

Regards,

Bruce

[BruceDLimber]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

As we know the Koran is full with social laws and punishments, whereas the bible isn't.

Which simply goes to show that the earlier religions primarily addressed the individual's spiritual growth, whereas beginning with Islam society also became a central topic, a fact arguably even more the case in the Baha'i Faith to the point where it now ranks equal with individual spirituality!

Best, :-)

Bruce

[BruceDLimber]

Peter, let me pass this on to you; I hope you may find it relevant and helpful!

http://bahai-library.com/articles/cr...punishment.pdf

Regards,

Bruce

[Popeyesays]

Originally Posted by BruceDLimber

Peter, let me pass this on to you; I hope you may find it relevant and helpful!

http://bahai-library.com/articles/cr...punishment.pdf

Regards,

Bruce

Bruce,
\I doubt that the average murderer by arson is terribly concerned with the good of his soul in the next world, nor does he have the view of God that would let him go snapping his fingers and singing to his own death. That's martyrdom, not execution.
Execution is a bitter thing, especially in this world today. It causes nearly as much division and anguish as abortion, The European view is that execution is not a desirable means of punishment.
Mr. Schaefer has some interesting takes on what modern 'justice' has become--not an instrument of justice at all, but a utilitarian approach to deterring crime.
Unfortunately, the utilitarian approach does not really deter crime. Crime and murder are not usually utilitarian acts in the first place.
The crumpling of society around us is obvious to anyone who looks, things ARE falling apart under their own weight and we are in a conundrum as to how to deal with that fact of life.
Mr. Schaefer's pdf article is amazing (though I wish I could fix the obvious typo--'it should be 'yoke of oppression' which is a quote from Baha`u'llah, not 'JOKE of oppression' as it is in the document.)
I would also suggest Schaefer's article: The new morality: an outline

Bahá'u'lláh made it very clear that the "weakening of the pillars of religion" would "lead in the end to chaos and confusion. Indeed, when there is no God, no metaphysical responsibility, no metaphysical sanction for misdeeds, when our existence is purposeless, there is little motivation to do good and to shun evil. "
Of particular interest to me were the listings of divine virtues:
Truthfulness (and the associated virtues of honesty, uprightness and sincerity) is "the foundation of all human virtues", without which "progress and success in all the worlds of God is impossible." Truthfulness is of crucial importance for one's spiritual health. It is the opposite of falseness, hypocrisy, dissimulation, untruthfulness and lying, which is "the worst of qualities", the "most odious of attributes", the "foundation of all evil", "a destroyer of all human perfections and the cause of innumerous vices. Hypocrisy, a constant danger particularly in religious circles, is strongly condemned.

Trustworthiness has been elevated in the Bahá'í scripture, where it appears as "the supreme ornament of the people of Bahá", "the greatest portal leading unto the tranquillity and security of the people. Trust is a fundamental condition of life. Mistrust, which stunts men's spiritual life and their relationship to one another, can only be overcome in an atmosphere of trust.
Justice ('adl wa ináf ) has a unique rank. It is the sum of all worldly virtues. Its precedence over all the worldly virtues is in accordance with the philosophical tradition. Justice is a complex concept and its many different ramifications cannot be covered here. It should be mentioned that the Golden Rule is also an expression of justice as are such injunctions and commandments as to pay "regard for the rights that are due to one's parents" or to "refrain from slander, abuse and whatever causeth sadness in men", "from backbiting or calumny.

Justice ('adl wa ináf ) has a unique rank. It is the sum of all worldly virtues. Its precedence over all the worldly virtues is in accordance with the philosophical tradition. Justice is a complex concept and its many different ramifications cannot be covered here. It should be mentioned that the Golden Rule is also an expression of justice as are such injunctions and commandments as to pay "regard for the rights that are due to one's parents" or to "refrain from slander, abuse and whatever causeth sadness in men", "from backbiting or calumny.

Moderation, one of the classical ethic's four cardinal virtues, aims at the "happy mean." It is a fundamental value for individual and social ethics. According to Bahá'u'lláh, everything "carried to excess" exercises "a pernicious influence upon men", especially freedom and material civilisation. Hence, moderation should be exercised "in all matters" an injunction which applies even to the practise of the virtues themselves.
Wisdom and prudence, which are concerned with the right way of thinking correspond to the complex concept of ikma. This term denotes the discernment of relations and connections, the knowledge of the practical conditions and requirements of life, the real assessment of concrete situations, the clear and right way of knowing, concluding, judging and planning, and the choice of the "right means" and "right ends: "The sword of wisdom is hotter than summer heat, and sharper than blades of steel. Man should "put on the armour of wisdom" and "be guided by wisdom" in all his doings, and "under all conditions. The source of wisdom is the fear of God, which is "the essence of wisdom. Wisdom and prudence are the beginning of all moral action and thought. Both are always focused on the good. Not only must the end be good, but the means must be good as well. The end does not justify the means. Wisdom and prudence should be applied especially when propagating the message of God or implementing the laws of God, "so that nothing might happen that could cause disturbance and dissension or raise clamour among the heedless--a clear warning against fanatical rigidity and excessive legalism.

Devotion to others: love, loving-kindness, mercy and compassion.
Whereas justice is the sum of all virtues, love (maabba) is the foundation of all morality, the very prerequisite of the "worldly virtues." These two are interdependent: love which is devoid of justice, is mere sentimentality and emotive effusiveness, it is, as Thomas Aquinas put it, "the mother of disintegration; justice without love, however, turns into cruelty
Justice, moderation, and wisdom and prudence are all counter-balances which a code of justice must have. And, in the interest of society, we must demand that all those virtues are kept to the forefront when a system of courts and justice is established.
----

Regards,
Scott

[smkolins]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

Right right, I think I'm grasping the view now Smoklins, as to before I didn't I admit. What Bahaullah actually ment was that if one burns something then by some karamatic justified balance of the universe they have made themselves susceptible to the same crime?

Well kind of - the Baha'i faith doesn't accept the exact principal of karma. Rather God manifests Justice just as Mercy - and yes Mercy exceeds Justice but not to the point of making Justice mute. At some level Justice itself is a mercy too.

If one has done wrong, paying for it can have a redemptive quality.

[smkolins]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

[color=black][font=Verdana]In England[color=black] where I live capital punishment is illegal, I have grown up to believe the American penal system is wrong.

I'd strongly suggest not convoluting the two - the Baha'i stance on punishment and the US penal system are <sigh> lamentably divergent. In the US there are almost as many people against the current system as there are for it - it has been suspended in a few cases. The problem is applying the law in a fundamentally unfair manner.

[BruceDLimber]

Originally Posted by Popeyesays

I wish I could fix the obvious typo--'it should be 'yoke of oppression' which is a quote from Baha`u'llah, not 'JOKE of oppression' as it is in the document

Actually, the typo isn't all that surprising given that in German, "J" is often pronounced "Y," so that it's a fairly simple Freudian slip to substitute a "J" by mistake!

Regards,

Bruce