Women excluded from the UHJ?

[Darz]

During my investigation of the Baha'i Faith I have come across numerous articles and comments that say that women are excluded from being elected to and serving on the Universal House of Justice.

However, today I found a completely contradictory statement on the Universal House of Justice website(found in the quote).

After seeing this statement, I am completely confused as to why I have read statements(which were even written after this declaration) which lead me to believe that women are still to this current day being excluded from serving on the UHJ.

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif, Lucida Handwriting]The appointed body of the Universal House of Justice in its first stage, once and for all, herby resolves that:

Based upon the Explicit Holy Text and the clear and manifest proofs and evidences contained within, and in accordance with, the revealed statements of Baha'u'llah, 'Abdu'l-Baha, and Shoghi Effendi, the Universal House of Justice shall be comprised of both men and women.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif, Lucida Handwriting]And furthermore, that:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif, Lucida Handwriting] The membership of both men and women on the Universal House of Justice is constituted within the Baha'i Administrative Order, that is, the membership of both men and women on the Universal House of Justice forms an irremovable part of the constitution of the Universal House of Justice in all its stages.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif, Lucida Handwriting]And therefore, that: [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif, Lucida Handwriting] In confomity with, and in enforcement of, the Explicit Holy Text, if women are not elected to the Universal House of Justice than that election shall be declared invalid.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif, Lucida Handwriting][Approved this eighteenth day of Mulk in the year one hundred and fifty-two of the Baha'i Era (February 24, 1996)][/FONT]

Womens Rights and Baha'i Faith Justice

 

[Adib]

UHJ.net is not the website of the Universal House of Justice located at the Baha'i World Center in Haifa. It is a website owned by the "Baha'is Under the Provision of the Covenant", a small breakaway group that has fragmented into even more "groups" since its inception, all with under a dozen members.

The truth of the matter is that women are ineligible for election to the Universal House of Justice (ours, the one prescribed by `Abdu'l-Baha in his Will and Testament, and not some House which a few people decided to create), and we only have `Abdu'l-Baha's guarantee that the reasoning behind this injunction of Baha'u'llah will one day be as clear as the midday sun. Some people have developed theories or explanations of their own, such as myself, but they are certainly not authoritative and are merely opinions and conjecture on the subject.

Be careful which sites you visit. If they talk about a Guardian after Shoghi Effendi or a "headless House" or "House with a Davidic king" and are trying to legitimize any of those things, they are not Baha'is.

 

[Darz]

UHJ.net is not the website of the Universal House of Justice located at the Baha'i World Center in Haifa. It is a website owned by the "Baha'is Under the Provision of the Covenant", a small breakaway group that has fragmented into even more "groups" since its inception, all with under a dozen members.

Be careful which sites you visit. If they talk about a Guardian after Shoghi Effendi or a "headless House" or "House with a Davidic king" and are trying to legitimize any of those things, they are not Baha'is.

Thank you for clearing that up. Yes, I did read the Davidic King section and I found it very questionable. Thanks for the warning.

The truth of the matter is that women are ineligible for election to the Universal House of Justice (ours, the one prescribed by `Abdu'l-Baha in his Will and Testament, and not some House which a few people decided to create), and we only have `Abdu'l-Baha's guarantee that the reasoning behind this injunction of Baha'u'llah will one day be as clear as the midday sun.

Could you please direct me to the quote where Baha'u'llah makes this decree.

Some people have developed theories or explanations of their own, such as myself, but they are certainly not authoritative and are merely opinions and conjecture on the subject.

Do you mind sharing some of the more popular theories or even your own?

 

[Adib]

Could you please direct me to the quote where Baha'u'llah makes this decree.

This passage, now written by the Pen of Glory, is accounted as part of the Most Holy Book: The men of God’s House of Justice have been charged with the affairs of the people.

(Baha'u'llah, The Tablet of Ishraq, p. 91)

In Baha'i theology, as you may be aware, `Abdu'l-Baha was vested by his father with the ability to interpret his Writings without being susceptible to error. He states the following regarding the above quote:

"The House of Justice, however, according to the explicit text of the Law of God, is confined to men; this for a wisdom of the Lord God's which will ere long be made manifest as clearly as the sun at high noon.

(Selections from the writings of Abdu'l Baha (rev. ed) Haifa: Baha'i World Center, 1982), p. 80)

Do you mind sharing some of the more popular theories or even your own?

I don't know of any popular theories, but I will share mine.

As you may know from reading Baha'i texts, a Supreme/International Tribunal (also referred to as a Universal Court of Arbitration) will eventually be formed. With regard to these two institutions, Shoghi Effendi says the following:

"The Universal Court of Arbitration and the International Tribunal are the same. When the Bahá'í State will be established they will be merged in the Universal House of Justice."

(Letter written on behalf of the Guardian in June 17 1933.)

My theory is that if and when the House and this court merge, the consummation of the two will result in a new institution. In this merging process, perhaps the injunction precluding women from joining the House will dissolve, since this new institution might not be the same as the Universal House of Justice which preceded it. This would mean that, in theory, women would be able to be elected to this new institution. Again, this is only if the new institution does not refer to themselves as the Universal House of Justice, as Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha have both stated that women cannot be elected to that institution. Nothing is mentioned, however, about an institution which may potentially succeed it.

So why did Baha'u'llah prevent women from joining to begin with if they might be able to in the future? If I had to guess, it would be because at his time and in consideration of where he lived and traveled, the idea of women being the leaders of anything - much less an entire religion - would have been outrageous. Therefore this untold ability to join a future institution would make sense: people in the regions where Baha'u'llah lived and traveled were closed-minded then, now, and probably will remain as such beyond the foreseeable future, or however long it takes for the stench of extremism to quit lingering. But if the emergence of a Baha'i State were to take place several generations from now, then perhaps the minds of those aforementioned regions will collectively shed their shells and become more open to the idea of women leading a religion. By the time this revolution of thought occurs, these two institutions will merge and women would be able to be elected to this new one. It would make sense to me because then Baha'u'llah would have called for an institution with conditions that would be accepted by most Westerners (ones who don't let small details get in the way of finding truth) and those in the East in this day and age as well as Baha'u'lah's, but in reality that institution was not meant to last based on Shoghi Effendi's above statement - it would eventually culminate into a new institution, one that would fit the standards of a more accepting humanity, comprised of both East and West. In this light, Baha'u'llah beautifully ordained for a leading institution which would fit a humanity wherein the Faith was still comparatively obscure (today) as well one which would succeed it that fits the conditions for a collectively more tolerant humanity.

Remember, this is all theory and opinion, and I'm not suggesting that women can sit on the House of Justice, because they cannot. Please let me know if you have any questions; I apologize for the verbosity and confusing nature of my hypothesis.

 

[Jonsul]

I just figured it was how god said about a household in the bible in how men are to be the spiritual leaders. I took all this as Baha'u'llah wanting to use god's view of a family to the spiritual leadership of the baha'i worldwide family.

 

[Darz]

As you may know from reading Baha'i texts, a Supreme/International Tribunal (also referred to as a Universal Court of Arbitration) will eventually be formed.

Will the Universal Court of Arbitration and the International Tribunal be Baha'i institutions?

So why did Baha'u'llah prevent women from joining to begin with if they might be able to in the future? If I had to guess, it would be because at his time and in consideration of where he lived and traveled, the idea of women being the leaders of anything - much less an entire religion - would have been outrageous. Therefore this untold ability to join a future institution would make sense: people in the regions where Baha'u'llah lived and traveled were closed-minded then, now, and probably will remain as such beyond the foreseeable future, or however long it takes for the stench of extremism to quit lingering.

A pragmatic and logical hypothesis, one which I can agree with. However it seems strange to me, given that Baha'u'llah's message was already unpopular with a majority of the masses, why he felt the need to add this decree to appease those that were already following him. His entire message was so progressive and profound, I am skeptical of the idea that this group of people would have largely abandoned him if he had told them the opposite.

I just figured it was how god said about a household in the bible in how men are to be the spiritual leaders. I took all this as Baha'u'llah wanting to use god's view of a family to the spiritual leadership of the baha'i worldwide family.

Women are just as capable of being spiritual leaders as men are. I see that message from the Bible as a consequence of men's desires to support the unequal gender status of the time.

 

[arthra]

The Baha'i view of the family though may be different from the past in that we believe in the equality of men and women today...

"The world of humanity is possessed of two wings: the male and the female. So long as these two wings are not equivalent in strength, the bird will not fly. Until womankind reaches the same degree as man, until she enjoys the same arena of activity, extraordinary attainment for humanity will not be realized; humanity cannot wing its way to heights of real attainment. When the two wings . . . become equivalent in strength, enjoying the same prerogatives, the flight of man will be exceedingly lofty and extraordinary."

~ 'Abdu'l-Baha'i, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 375

In the Baha'i view the education of women should have priority:

Until the reality of equality between man and woman is fully established and attained, the highest social development of mankind is not possible. Even granted that woman is inferior to man in some degree of capacity or accomplishment, this or any other distinction would continue to be productive of discord and trouble. The only remedy is education, opportunity; for equality means equal qualification....

... And let it be known once more that until woman and man recognize and realize equality, social and political progress here or anywhere will not be possible.

~ 'Abdu'l-Baha'i, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, pp. 76-77

- Art

 

[Varion Zanzibar]

I think that even in Western society, we still have some way to go before we can claim that we practise the equality of man and women. Just look at the number of women in governement, or holding high positions in just about every fields. And if not at work, then what about at home. Our society still hasn't develop a perfect solution for mothers who want to work, without giving up on their family. Of course, there are plenty of working mothers. But if you ask them if their life is the ideal life, probably they'd say that they wish they had less pressure from work, and more time with their family.

It was interesting to read about the proposition that in the future, the UHJ will be superceeded by a higher institution, and that maybe then, the world will be able to accept women at the highest level of a religious institution.

On my side, I think it's best not to focuss on this very specific issue, but rather, on the Baha'i system as a whole. If you compare it with the way other religions are currently run, then what is more to say... Baha'is are miles ahead of everybody else.

If you want to smile, then here are my guess for why there is this rule: soon enough, women will have worked out a system where men are not needed in the reproduction cycle. Then women will ask: "why do we need men, at all!". The answer will be obvious to all: "Because of the UHJ".

 

[arthra]

Welcome to Religious Forums Varion!

- Art

 

[DallasApple]

And if not at work, then what about at home.

And the reality is? Mothers who stay at home are at HIGH risk of poverty if the "man" decides to run off 10 15 20 years later with a younger model.SAHM are undervalued..we get no SS retiremtnet.We get "no respect".

If we do go to work its on OUR backs to juggle.Not the man.

Its very complicated.And its not "equal".Look at Drak'as father..he said he woudl be less likely to hire a woman..because she is most likey to be taking time off to tend to children over a man with the same qualifications.Then if you do stay at home you are considered a freeloading domestic prostitute.Dont say Im on a 'rant"..It is the mindframe.(for many still).Staying at home full time and raising the children is NOT considered "work" by many.

This mind frame even gets dragged into her "obligation to have sex" with the man because he "works" and supports her.

BLAHHHHHHH

Love

Dallas

Love

Dallas

 

[arthra]

This why Baha'is stress the education of women and also women are involved in the community..

In the Bahá'í teachings there are two extraordinary statements about the education of women. First, that women's education is of greater importance than men's education and, secondly, that not until the equality of opportunity in education for the two sexes is established will the foundations of war be removed.(1) These challenging ideas deserve study in order for us to understand their meaning and ramifications.

The principle of sexual equality in education - one facet of the general principle of the equality of the sexes - was revolutionary when given by Bahá'u'lláh in the mid 1800s.(2) It was set forth more than half a century before western thought added sexual equality to its list of rationally-based moral principles of relevance to political life, such as democracy, secularism, and the rights of the individual, and long before it became enshrined in numerous national and international documents as a politically correct, universal value.

If there has to be say a choice between educating a boy or a girl we advocate educating the girl first.

In Baha'i homes men are not the "head of the household" rather the principle we employ is consultation on family matters as equals husband and wife..

"The world in the past has been ruled by force, and man has dominated over woman by reason of his more forceful and aggressive qualities both of body and mind. But the balance is already shifting; force is losing its dominance, and mental alertness, intuition, and the spiritual qualities of love and service, in which woman is strong, are gaining ascendancy. Hence the new age will be an age less masculine and more permeated with the feminine ideals . . . an age in which the masculine and feminine elements of civilization will be more evenly balanced."

- Abdul-Baha

Star of the West 3 (April 28, 1912), no. 3, p. 4.

 

[Varion Zanzibar]

Baha'is are miles ahead of everybody else.

For clarification, women are already, today, represented in equal amount on all Baha'i positions (except, of course, from the UHJ, just as this threat talks about).

So equality of men and women is not a distant dream for Baha'is, it is happening today.

 

[Cosmos]

UHJ.net is not the website of the Universal House of Justice located at the Baha'i World Center in Haifa. It is a website owned by the "Baha'is Under the Provision of the Covenant", a small breakaway group that has fragmented into even more "groups" since its inception, all with under a dozen members.


The truth of the matter is that women are ineligible for election to the Universal House of Justice (ours, the one prescribed by `Abdu'l-Baha in his Will and Testament, and not some House which a few people decided to create), and we only have `Abdu'l-Baha's guarantee that the reasoning behind this injunction of Baha'u'llah will one day be as clear as the midday sun. Some people have developed theories or explanations of their own, such as myself, but they are certainly not authoritative and are merely opinions and conjecture on the subject.

Be careful which sites you visit. If they talk about a Guardian after Shoghi Effendi or a "headless House" or "House with a Davidic king" and are trying to legitimize any of those things, they are not Baha'is.

The word used explicitly to explain the status of those eligible for the Universal House of Justice is the Arabic "rijal". This word is a masculine definitive but has many usages, including "notable" (women included). Currently the Haifa UHJ interprets this to mean that women cannot become seated members of the Universal House of Justice of Baha'u'llah but are not making an accurate translation or being honest to what Baha'u'llah AND Abdu'l-Baha said on the matter!

Here are some proofs that women are eligible for service on the "International Executive" (Shoghi Effendi's designation) level and legislative branch of the Universal House of Justice:

"Today the maidservants of God are accounted as men"
(Payam-i Malakut, p. 231)

[Arabic: Imruz ama'u'llah az rijal mahsub]

"In this most great cycle and this century of the preexistent King, human limitations have been lifted and the laws of the worlds of being have been abrogated and annulled. Masculinity and femininity do not depend upon beards, moustaches, athletic strength, and wielding maces. [Masculinity] depends on courage, power, knowledge, steadfastness, uprightness, passion and attraction. How many mistresses of the bridal chamber have been sent forth and how many men have been consigned to headscarves and meekness."
(Yazdani, Maqam va Huquq-i Zan, pp. 13-14)

:clap

My source is from a former Baha'i who was attacked by the Haifa UHJ only because he dare to ask legitimate questions as a free-thinking individual and eventually excommunicated himself from the Faith. Please read, "Women's Service on the Universal House of Justice" by Juan R.I. Cole, Department of History, University of Michigan. Though voluntarily leaving the Faith he is not a Covenant-Breaker nor is he affiliated with any (said) 'covenant-breaking' organizations, so please do not shy away from the information presented in the essay. He is a highly accredited scholar who speaks fluent Arabic and Persian so he is capable of reading the Sacred Writings in the original context. The whole essay contains a solid argument based on evidences of the Writings of both Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha!



Before attacking others, as we do not attack you--in fact, I participate willingly within the Baha'i community even though I would be ostracized for being a Baha'i Under the Provisions of the Covenant. If we actually read the Master's Will and Testament pages 13-15 we find the explicit delineation of how the Universal House of Justice of Baha'u'llah is to be founded--with the EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCHES ("twin pillars") of the Administrative Order! In fact, Shoghi Effendi himself thus:

"Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship the World Order of Bahá’u’lláh would be mutilated and permanently deprived of that hereditary principle which, as ‘Abdu’l-Bahá has written, has been invariably upheld by the Law of God. 'In all the Divine Dispensations,' He states, in a Tablet addressed to a follower of the Faith in Persia, 'the eldest son hath been given extraordinary distinctions. Even the station of prophethood hath been his birthright.' Without such an institution the integrity of the Faith would be imperiled, and the stability of the entire fabric would be gravely endangered. Its prestige would suffer, the means required to enable it to take a long, an uninterrupted view over a series of generations would be completely lacking, and the necessary guidance to define the sphere of the legislative action of its elected representatives would be totally withdrawn."--The World Order of Baha'u'llah, pg. 148

So what was the Master talking about? It's "clear as the midday sun" that He is referring to the instruction in the AQDAS PARAGRAPH 32:clap wherein Baha'u'llah says that an Aghsan (Davidic King) would be established within His House of Justice. In fact, the greatest bubble-popper is the creation of Shoghi Effendi's FIRST International Baha'i Council which was to function as the "embryonic Universal House of Justice" (Shoghi's words) on January 9, 1951, with Amelia Collins as the serving vice president! FACTS! Anyone can read this even on Wikipedia and I have personally read the admission of Baha'i scholars, such as the infamous Adib Taherzadeh, as well as from letters of the Haifa Universal House of Justice, that this is the case, including the FACT that Charles Mason Remey was intended by Shoghi Effendi to serve as President of the IBC. :thud:

These are not fabrications! Every time a 'mainstream' sans-Guardian Baha'i talks down to the Provision Baha'is and says things like... "Be careful which sites you visit. If they talk about a Guardian after Shoghi Effendi or a "headless House" or "House with a Davidic king" and are trying to legitimize any of those things, they are not Baha'is."... it reminds me of the lack of research on the part of those who accuse others of being "Covenant-Breakers" because they do not understand esoterism or do not comprehend the dilineation of the Covenant of Baha'u'llah, but rely upon authority figures of which we are to shirk. Here, my friends, allow me to put into perspective why exactly BUPC talks so much over the "Davidic Kingship" being the Guardianship/presidency or active executive branch of the authentic Universal House of Justice:
THE Most Great Law is come, and the Ancient Beauty ruleth upon the throne of David. Thus hath My Pen spoken that which the histories of bygone ages have related. At this time, however, David crieth aloud and saith: ‘O my loving Lord! Do Thou number me with such as have stood steadfast in Thy Cause, O Thou through Whom the faces have been illumined, and the footsteps have slipped!’ :faint:--Proclamation of Baha'u'llah, pgs. 89-90


DOES ANYONE SEE?! The very proof of the Mission of Baha'u'llah is in the FACT that He IS a living descendant of King David therefore fulfilling prophecy as the Promised One of all ages and religions! He is the Messiah (full title "Messiach ben David" or "Son of David")!

Please educate yourselves beyond the prejudice of authority figures.