Bahá’í World/Volume 31/Obligation and Responsibility in Constructing a World Civilization

[Page 147]

Obligation and Responsibility in Constructing a World Civilization[edit]

Dr. Hoda Mahmoudi examines the nature of a spiritualized society founded on altruism and reciprocity and based on the principles described in the Bahá’í writings.

Constructing a world commonwealth grounded in obligation and responsibility is not an easy task. The twentieth century has shown the capacity of human beings to inflict unimaginable pain, suffering, and destruction upon one another. In terms of civil violence, mass murder, and genocide, no other century rivals that of the twentieth, and it remains to be seen what the twenty-first century has to offer in this regard. The collapse of communism and the end of the Cold War, rather than bringing an end to a long-standing ideological battle, seem to have fuelled the flames of nationalism, ethnic rivalries, and religious hatred, thus bringing to the surface, in an extreme form, the terror and ugliness of ethnic cleansing. At any given time around the globe, countless atrocities are inflicted by one group of human beings upon another. In fact, an assessment of the current global community cannot help but conclude that at the early stages of the twenty-first century, humanity, rather than acting on the reality of its interdependence and its need for collaboration, is instead pursuing a course that hinders the possibility of building bonds of cooperation and peaceful existence, and appears to stand on the brink of total disorder and chaos. [Page 148]As the forces of globalization continue to unfold, the world community finds itself in a quagmire of growing political instability, intensifying economic inequality, and the weakening of family, educational, and religious authority. Never before in history have the widely dispersed, diverse peoples and cultures of the planet lived in such close proximity to one another. And yet within this emerging global community deep attitudes of suspicion, distrust, and hatred persist among its diverse populations. Those engaged in the study of cultures have, on the one hand, pointed to multiculturalism as a means for democratic society to recognize and promote equal representation of all, including equal access to economic means." But multiculturalism is challenged by deep-rooted prejudices and attitudes of superiority and control amongst certain groups or cultures that actively impede possibilities of removing barriers, resolving differences, and promoting advancement towards coexistence.

Others, like Samuel Huntington, view the emerging global community as one wherein "the clash of civilizations" or conflict between cultures is inevitable. In particular, Huntington views the post-Cold War era as one in which "cultural identities" are "shaping the patterns of cohesion, disintegration, and conflict." He describes this "new world" thus:

In the post-Cold War world flags count and so do other symbols of cultural identity, including crosses, crescents, and even head coverings, because culture counts, and cultural identity is what is most meaningful to most people. People are discovering new but often old identities and marching under new but often old flags which lead to wars with new but often old enemies."

For many, modernity and its initial optimism and promise for a better, more advanced economic system and rationalization in organization is viewed as a failed experiment. Many critics believe that

Amy Gutmann, ed., Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics of Recognition (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), p. 3. 2 Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1998). 3 Ibid., p. 20. 4 Ibid. [Page 149]modern society is incapable of resolving its basic social ills, much less the more complex global uncertainties that challenge humankind to search for new paradigms of international life and civil organization and governance. Sociologist Robert Bellah and others describe this seeming impotence of the modern age:

There is a widespread feeling that the promise of the modern era is slipping away from us. A movement of enlightenment and liberation that was to have freed us from superstition and tyranny has led in the twentieth century to a world in which ideological fanaticism and political oppression have reached extremes unknown in previous history.5

In Seedbeds of Virtue, Mary Ann Glendon points out how in postmodern academy, words like “virtue” and “character have nearly disappeared from the lexicon of the modern human sciences.”6 Others have observed a decline in public morality as democratic societies have spread, as growth in prosperity has occurred, and as personal freedom has expanded.7

Jonathan Sacks, in his book The Dignity of Difference: How to Avoid the Clash of Civilizations, suggests that the current conflict-ridden global community is in need of common values that promote coexistence if we are to avoid the clash of civilizations. He writes,

[N]ation-states seem increasingly unable to control global phenomena from multinational corporations to ecological devastation, and we have not yet evolved a form of global governance. Market capitalism has increased wealth beyond the imagination of previous generations, but cannot, in and of itself, distribute it equally or even equitably. There are problems that cannot be solved within the terms set by modernity, for the simple reason that they are not procedural, but rather valuational or, to use

5 Robert N. Bellah et al., Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985), p. 277. 6 Mary Ann Glendon and David Blankenhorn, eds., Seedbeds of Virtue: Sources of Competence, Character, and Citizenship in American Society (Lanham, MD: Madison Books, 1995), p. 5. 7 James Q. Wilson, “Liberalism, Modernism, and the Good Life,” in Seedbeds of Virtue, pp. 17–34. [Page 150]the simple word, moral. There is no way of bypassing difficult moral choices by way of a scientific decision—a procedure that states: “Maximize X.” We first have to decide which X we wish to maximize, and how to weigh X against Y when the pursuit of one damages the fulfilment of the other. The human project is inescapably a moral project. That is one reason why the great faiths, with their history of reflection on moral issues, must be part of the conversation.⁸

Sociologist Philip Selznick defines modernity as referring to “the special features of the technologically advanced industrial, commercial, urban society that has taken shape in the West since the eighteenth century, anticipated, of course, by earlier trends and ideas.”⁹ He presents a constructive perspective of modern life by suggesting that

Modern life offers a welcome if risky challenge to the moral order. As self-determination is enlarged, as awareness is sharpened, the complexity of moral choice increases. The responsibility of individuals and groups becomes in many ways more self-conscious and more demanding. More is asked of us and we ask more of ourselves.¹⁰

In the late twentieth century, postmodernism emerged as a reaction to modernity, rejecting scientific objectivity, challenging the notion of coherence, and refuting the existence of any authoritative principles. Postmodernism rejects any form of truth, whether philosophical, scientific, or religious. Zygmunt Bauman, writing about the characteristics of postmodern literature, but making an observation relevant to society at large, states,

What the inherently polysemous and controversial idea of postmodernity most often refers to ... is first and foremost an acceptance of the ineradicable plurality of the world—not a temporary state

⁸ Jonathan Sacks, The Dignity of Difference: How to Avoid the Clash of Civilizations (London: Continuum, 2002), p. 195. ⁹ Philip Selznick, The Moral Commonwealth: Social Theory and the Promise of Community (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992), p. 7. ¹⁰ Ibid., p. 4. [Page 151]on the road to the not-yet-attained perfection, sooner or later to be left behind, but the constructive quality of existence. By the same token, postmodernity means a resolute emancipation from the characteristically modern urge to overcome difference and promote sameness.... In the plural and pluralistic world of postmodernity, every form of life is permitted on principle; or, rather, no agreed principles are evident which may render any form of life impermissible.11

In his discussion of the challenge of postmodernism, Philip Selznick points to its validity in relation to the “many insidious aspects of modern life, including hidden forms of power and manipulation.”12 He refers to postmodernism as the “wayward child of modernism” and suggests that “its central message carries ‘the logic of modernism to its farthest reaches.’” He then elaborates on this point:

It does so ... without retaining the intellectual, moral, and aesthetic strengths of modernism; without the belief that there is genuine truth to be discerned; without confidence in the possibility of creating new and better ways of manifesting the human spirit; without tacit commitment to continuity as well as change. What there was of exuberant optimism has been displaced by cynicism and despair. With some fidelity postmodern theorists reflect—and dramatize—the weakening of selfhood in late modernity.13

New ideologies continue to emerge, some with the goal of providing, on the one hand, solutions to the social ills presently at work throughout the world, and on the other, with grim explanations for the failure of any form of intervention that might be the source of remedy for the many global disorders. The unparalleled levels of violence, the proliferation of political corruption, the increased

11 Zygmunt Bauman, “Strangers: The Social Construction of Universality and Particularity,” in Telos 28, no. 23 (1988–89), quoted in Robert Kagan, In Over Our Heads: The Mental Demands of Modern Life (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1994), p. 326. 12 Selznick, Moral Commonwealth, p. 13. 13 Ibid. [Page 152]lawlessness, the breakdown in the code of ethics, the lax attitude toward ecological disintegration, the overall disregard for human rights, all such disorders seem to have brought humanity to its darkest hour. It is no wonder that the individual’s response to such dreadful developments is one of a paralysis of will, a sense of deep pessimism, and profound disaffection. At the heart of the current predicament in which a beleaguered global community finds itself, are complex questions about the future direction of humankind. Is there the potential for a way out of the present dark condition in which humanity finds itself? Is it possible for humans to find a common vision in advancing reasonable solutions to the present course of disintegration? Who can or should take responsibility for reversing the present bleak conditions faced by humankind?

The aim of this paper is to examine the challenging pronouncement advanced by Bahá’u’lláh, of the need for humankind in the present age to recognize and bring about a world community that is founded on the unification of the human race and the establishment of a new world order that is responsive to the needs of a single human race. The paper discusses the teachings of the Bahá’í Faith that address the establishment of the “constructive social forces which, because they are consistent with human nature, will encourage harmony and cooperation instead of war and conflict.”14

Cognizant of the capacity of human beings to do both good and evil, the paper examines, from the spiritual framework set forth in the Bahá’í writings, what it means to be human. It discusses the potential of the development, through moral education, of spiritual qualities leading to individual and institutional actions that aim to promote the welfare of others as more important than one’s own. It develops the Bahá’í concepts of reciprocity and altruism as providing a foundation for the formation of a society centered on “constructiveness and accomplishment in all the planes of human activity.”15

14 Universal House of Justice, The Promise of World Peace (Haifa: Bahá’í World Centre, 1985), p. 3.

15 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, The Promulgation of Universal Peace: Talks Delivered by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá during His Visit to the United States and Canada in 1912, rev. ed. (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1995), p. 338. [Page 153]

The Claim of Bahá’u’lláh[edit]

In the middle of the nineteenth century, Bahá’u’lláh imparted His vision of the oneness of humankind and the earth as a common homeland. In the 1860s, while an exile of the Ottoman Empire, Bahá’u’lláh wrote about the need for the creation of a “New World Order,” stating,

The winds of despair are, alas, blowing from every direction, and the strife that divides and afflicts the human race is daily increasing. The signs of impending convulsions and chaos can now be discerned, inasmuch as the prevailing order appears to be lamentably defective....
Soon will the present day Order be rolled up and a new one spread out in its stead.16

Some 70 years later, Shoghi Effendi wrote that the “dark forces ... of hate, rebellion, anarchy, and reaction are threatening the very stability of human society.”17 He expounded on the need for a new system (world order) as set forth by Bahá’u’lláh and set into motion a plan for its development towards the organization of an emerging global community. In 1936, he wrote the following about the disorder facing humanity and the need for its unification:

Beset on every side by the cumulative evidences of disintegration, of turmoil and of bankruptcy, serious-minded men and women, in almost every walk of life, are beginning to doubt whether society, as it is now organized, can, through its unaided efforts, extricate itself from the slough into which it is steadily sinking. Every system, short of the unification of the human race, has been tried, repeatedly tried, and been found wanting.18

16 Bahá’u’lláh, cited in Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh: Selected Letters, 2nd rev. ed. (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1993), pp. 32, 161. 17 Shoghi Effendi, Bahá’í Administration: Selected Messages 1922–1932 (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1995), p. 52. 18 Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 190. [Page 154]

Unification of the Human Race[edit]

A large part of Bahá’u’lláh’s writings is dedicated to the progressive nature of God’s revelation and man’s relationship to it. There is only one God, described in Bahá’u’lláh’s writings as an “unknowable Essence... exalted beyond every human attribute, such as corporeal existence, ascent and descent, egress and regress.”

19 “Know thou,” Bahá’u’lláh asserts, “that every created thing is a sign of the revelation of God.”20 Consequently, it is through the Will of God that successive revelations, or religions, are made known to humanity. The Bahá’í teachings view divine revelation not as a static, unique event, but as a continuing process that is the central feature of human history. There is only one religion. That there have been and will continue to be Prophets who introduce humankind to God’s progressive revelation does not imply that religion is in competition with itself. Rather, as explained by Bahá’u’lláh, “if thou callest them [Manifestations of God] all by one name, and dost ascribe to them the same attributes, thou hast not erred from the truth.... For they are all but one person, one soul, one spirit, one being, one revelation.”21 The spirit that inspired all the Founders of the great religions of the past, and will inspire Those to come in the future, is recognized as one and the same. Their original teachings contain the same basic ethical and moral precepts, prominent among which are the teachings that promote reciprocity and altruism. The tenets that change from one religious dispensation to another are the social laws and practices. Thus, religious truth is understood to be relative, progressive, and developmental.

Manifestations of God appear because humanity is in need of spiritual renewal. With every new revelation, a new Prophet, or Manifestation of God, appears with a twofold purpose. The first, according to Bahá’u’lláh, is “to liberate the children of men from the darkness of ignorance, and guide them to the light of true understanding.

19 Bahá’u’lláh, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1994), p. 46. 20 Ibid., p. 184. 21 Ibid., pp. 51 and 54- [Page 155]The second is to ensure the peace and tranquillity of mankind, and provide all the means by which they can be established.”22

According to Bahá’u’lláh, the first step towards the establishment of peace begins with the acceptance of the principle of the oneness of the human race. He states, “The well-being of mankind, its peace and security are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established.”23 He proclaims the principle of unity as the central purpose of His Faith. “So powerful is the light of unity,” declares Bahá’u’lláh, “that it can illuminate the whole earth.”24 The image that comes into view regarding the unification of the human race is that of a global community in which all inhabitants recognize and accept their membership in one human family. In Bahá’u’lláh’s own words, “The world is but one country, and mankind its citizens.”25 Shoghi Effendi explains that the “coming of age of the human race,” as proclaimed by Bahá’u’lláh, is associated with the unification of the human race, which will evolve into “the stage at which the oneness of the whole body of nations will be made the ruling principle of international life.”26

Bahá’u’lláh’s vision of the emerging international community calls for the widening of the existing foundations of society. It demands the reshaping of institutions in order that they be in harmony with “the needs of an ever-changing world.”27 In the following passage Shoghi Effendi summarizes what Bahá’u’lláh foreshadowed for the evolving global society:

Unification of the whole of mankind is the hall-mark of the stage which human society is now approaching. Unity of family, of tribe, of city-state, and nation have been successively attempted and fully established. World unity is the goal towards which a harassed humanity is striving. Nation-building has come to an end. The anarchy inherent in state sovereignty is moving towards

22 Ibid., pp. 79–80. 23 Bahá’u’lláh, cited in Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 203. 24 Bahá’u’lláh, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1995), p. 14. 25 Bahá’u’lláh, Gleanings, p. 250. 26 Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 193. 27 Ibid., p. 41. [Page 156]a climax. A world, growing to maturity, must abandon this fetish, recognize the oneness and wholeness of human relationships, and establish once and for all the machinery that can best incarnate this fundamental principle of its life.28

Given this vision of the oneness of humankind and the need for a new global world order, the question arises as to how the Bahá’í Faith envisages the development of such a system. In particular, what are the roles of the individual and of Bahá’í institutions in constructing a social life based on the unification of humankind living in a truly interdependent world commonwealth? How is such a system possible given the present moribund condition of the world community? Is it possible—or even realistic—to assume that human beings can bring about cooperation and constructiveness in social relationships?

The Bahá’í teachings address the development of social patterns that are necessary for the well-being of humankind. For the individual Bahá’í, personal commitment to the laws and principles of Bahá’u’lláh is the key to transforming oneself, which leads, in turn, to the transformation of civilization. One’s inner life and attitudes cannot be separated from one’s public life. The ethics and values that guide the individual are not separate from those of society.

In the following passage, Shoghi Effendi expounds on the importance of the interconnectedness of the individual and society:

We cannot segregate the human heart from the environment outside us and say that once one of these is reformed everything will be improved. Man is organic with the world. His inner life molds the environment and is itself also deeply affected by it. The one acts upon the other and every abiding change in the life of man is the result of these mutual reactions.29

The Bahá’í teachings shift the focus of religious practice from individual salvation or enlightenment to the collective responsibility

28 Ibid., p. 202.

29 Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, 17 February 1933, in Conservation of the Earth’s Resources, prepared by the Research Department of the Universal House of Justice (October 1989), in The Compilation of Compilations, vol. 1 (Ingleside, NSW: Bahá’í Publications Australia, 1991), p. 84. [Page 157]for the progress of humanity as a whole. The Bahá’í conception of social life is essentially based on the subordination of the individual will to that of society. The Bahá’í teachings address social conditions and global problems as directly related to the individual’s spiritual life and sense of responsibility; Bahá’í principles such as world peace, the equality of women and men, harmony between science and religion, the equitable distribution of wealth and resources, and the elimination of all forms of prejudice are, for Bahá’ís, inseparable from religious belief and practice.

This emphasis on collective progress has important implications for the relationship of individual entities—whether individual persons, institutions, nations, or other groups—to the larger society of which they form a part. As Shoghi Effendi describes, the relationship between these entities is based on the principle of the subordination of “every particularistic interest, be it personal, regional, or national, to the paramount interests of humanity.” This, in turn, is based on the idea that “in a world of inter-dependent peoples and nations the advantage of the part is best to be reached by the advantage of the whole.”30

Yet the “interests of humanity as a whole” are not conceived in terms of a vague abstraction that could be appropriated by a particular dominant group and interpreted as identical with its own interests but, rather, as a complex dynamic relationship between the parts and the whole, in which the viability of the whole is served by ensuring the well-being of all its individual parts, an enterprise for which all share responsibility.

This conception is demonstrated at its most basic level in the relationship of the individual person and society, in which a complex balance is sought between individual freedom and responsibility. Cooperation between society and the individual is stressed in the Bahá’í writings, as is the fostering of “a climate in which the untold potentialities of the individual members of society can develop.” Such a relationship, as it is envisioned, “must allow ‘free scope’ for ‘individuality to assert itself’ through modes of spontaneity, initiative, and diversity that ensure the viability of society.” Even while the will of

30 Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 198. [Page 158]the individual is subordinate to that of society, “the individual is not lost in the mass but becomes the focus of primary development.”31

Thus, a fundamental principle of social relations and structures for Bahá’ís lies in the realization of belief through practice. The fulfilment of individual potential is to be sought not in pursuing self-centered desires but in contributing to the benefit and well-being of others, and in the belief that “the honor and distinction of the individual consist in this, that he among all the world’s multitudes should be a source of social good.”32 This challenging assertion as put forth in Bahá’í teachings cannot be fully understood without an examination of the Bahá’í perspective of what it means to be a human being and what is the purpose of life for humans.

The Dual Nature of the Human Being[edit]

The paleontologist Ian Tattersall, in his book Becoming Human, describes what he believes sets humans apart from animals: “[I]f we have to identify any single characteristic that sets us apart, one of the things that is truly extraordinary about human beings is their finely honed perception of the world beyond their social milieu.”33

Differences between human beings and animals are explained with great care in the Bahá’í writings. Animals are “captive of the senses” and do not have “the powers of ideation and conscious reflection”; “they are without education and training” and “have no touch with the spiritual world and are without conception of God.”34 And yet, animals are described as being keener than humans when it comes to bodily senses. Animals manifest superiority to humans in their “powers such as hearing, sight, smell, taste, and touch,”35

31 Universal House of Justice, Individual Rights and Freedoms in the World Order of Bahá’u’lláh: A Statement by the Universal House of Justice (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1989), pp. 20–21.

32 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, The Secret of Divine Civilization (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1994), p. 2.

33 Ian Tattersall, Becoming Human: Evolution and Human Uniqueness (New York: Harcourt Brace & Co., 1998), p. 195.

34 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Promulgation of Universal Peace, pp. 255, 172–73, 311.

35 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1994), p. 187. [Page 159]but they are unable to “perceive intellectual realities.” ‘Abdu’l-Bahá writes,

For example, that which is within the range of its vision the animal sees, but that which is beyond the range of sight it is not possible for it to perceive, and it cannot imagine it. So it is not possible for the animal to understand that the earth has the form of a globe. But man from known things proves unknown things and discovers unknown truths.36

The Bahá’í writings describe the “human spirit” as the “rational soul,” unique to humans and absent in the world of nature, explaining that the “rational soul is the substance through which the body exists.”37 Regarding the nature of the human spirit, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá says,

When you wish to reflect upon or consider a matter, you consult something within you. You say, shall I do it, or shall I not do it? Is it better to make this journey or abandon it? Whom do you consult? Who is within you deciding this question? Surely there is a distinct power, an intelligent ego. Were it not distinct from your ego, you would not be consulting it. It is greater than the faculty of thought. It is your spirit which teaches you, which advises and decides upon matters.38

Although humans are different from animals in significant ways, as described above, they nevertheless, have a dual nature. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá describes this duality in the human being, stating,

[A]s an animal he is subject to nature, but in his spiritual or conscious being he transcends the world of material existence. His spiritual powers, being nobler and higher, possess virtues of which nature intrinsically has no evidence; therefore, they triumph over natural conditions.39

36 Ibid., p. 187.

37 Ibid., p. 240.

38 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 242.

39 Ibid., p. 81. [Page 160]In another place ‘Abdu’l-Bahá states the following about the duality of human beings:

But the spirit of man has two aspects: one divine, one satanic—that is to say, it is capable of the utmost perfection, or it is capable of the utmost imperfection. If it acquires virtues, it is the most noble of the existing beings; and if it acquires vices, it becomes the most degraded.40

Humans, then, have the capacity for both good and evil acts. However, the force of darkness must be overcome through deliberate attention and great effort in the development of the force of light or goodness. Shoghi Effendi, in a letter written on his behalf, explained the Bahá’í perspective that “evil exists ... and we cannot close our eyes to it, even though it is a negative existence. We must seek to supplant it by good.”41 It is through spiritual education that the individual learns to demonstrate the constructive force through deeds. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá explains that it is the role of religion to provide spiritual education, which, in turn, is a means for the alleviation of the destructive forces. He states, “Close investigation will show that the primary cause of oppression and injustice, of unrighteousness, irregularity, and disorder, is the people’s lack of religious faith and the fact that they are uneducated.”42

Being Human[edit]

The Bahá’í viewpoint on human nature is not based on a specific philosophical, anthropological, political, or sociological theory. The station and purpose of human beings is explicitly defined by Bahá’u’lláh in the following passage:

Having created the world and all that liveth and moveth therein, He [God], through the direct operation of His unconstrained and

40 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions, p. 144.

41 Shoghi Effendi, Unfolding Destiny: The Messages from the Guardian of the Bahá’í Faith to the Bahá’í Community of the British Isles (London: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1981), pp. 457–58.

42 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Secret of Divine Civilization, p. 18. [Page 161]sovereign Will, chose to confer upon man the unique distinction and capacity to know Him and to love Him—a capacity that must needs be regarded as the generating impulse and the primary purpose underlying the whole of creation.43

This unique distinction bestowed upon man confers responsibility and capacity for the cultivation of spiritual virtues in the service of the collective advancement of society.

In addition to describing God’s purpose in creating man and his unique station, Bahá’u’lláh addresses the lofty purpose inherent in every individual to become the “source of all goodness ... and an example of uprightness to mankind.”44 He states, “Noble have I created thee, yet thou hast abased thyself. Rise then unto that for which thou wast created.”45 Furthermore, He declares, “We love to see you at all times consorting in amity and concord ... and to inhale from your acts the fragrance of friendliness and unity, of loving-kindness and fellowship.”46 The Bahá’í teachings insist that the individual leave behind outdated traditions, prejudices, superstitions, narrow-mindedness, and provincial tendencies that keep humanity apart. They invite the individual to acquire a “world embracing” vision that accepts the equality, well-being, and oneness of all people.

The Universal House of Justice explains the purpose for spiritual laws by comparing them to the laws that govern the physical lives of humans. It states,

Just as there are laws governing our physical lives, requiring that we must supply our bodies with certain foods, maintain them within a certain range of temperatures, and so forth, if we wish to avoid physical disabilities, so also there are laws governing our spiritual lives. These laws are revealed to mankind in each age by the Manifestation of God, and obedience to them is of vital importance if each human being, and mankind in general, is to develop properly and harmoniously. Moreover, these various

43 Bahá’u’lláh, Gleanings, p. 65.

44 Ibid., p. 315.

45 Bahá’u’lláh, The Hidden Words (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1994), Arabic no. 22, p. 9.

46 Bahá’u’lláh, Gleanings, p. 315. [Page 162]aspects are interdependent. If an individual violates the spiritual laws for his own development he will cause injury not only to himself but to the society in which he lives. Similarly, the condition of society has a direct effect on the individuals who must live within it.47

The station of man is thus one of refinement and righteousness through the application of spiritual principles and laws. In this process, individuals are responsible for their actions toward others and thus strive to become a source of positive influence on others as well as on the environment or the society in which they are actively involved.

What Bahá’u’lláh asks is that individuals embrace a vision far beyond the narrow confines of their traditional norms, wherein one’s family, clan, culture, or nation is considered as superior and separate. A vastly expanded circle of social interaction is called for. A higher level of consciousness and moral commitment is required in an international community that has developed highly complex levels of social interaction. Shoghi Effendi elucidates this point in the following passage:

Let there be no misgivings as to the animating purpose of the world-wide Law of Bahá’u’lláh. Far from aiming at the subversion of the existing foundations of society, it seeks to broaden its basis, to remold its institutions in a manner consonant with the needs of an ever-changing world. It can conflict with no legitimate allegiances, nor can it undermine essential loyalties. Its purpose is neither to stifle the flame of a sane and intelligent patriotism in men’s hearts, nor to abolish the system of national autonomy so essential if the evils of excessive centralization are to be avoided. It does not ignore, nor does it attempt to suppress, the diversity of ethical origins, of climate, of history, of language and tradition, of thought and habit, that differentiate the peoples and nations of the world. It calls for a wider loyalty, for a larger aspiration than any that has animated the human

47 Universal House of Justice, letter to all National Spiritual Assemblies, 6 February 1973, in Messages from the Universal House of Justice, 1963–1986 (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1996), p. 231. [Page 163]race. It insists upon the subordination of national impulses and interests to the imperative claims of a unified world. It repudiates excessive centralization on one hand, and disclaims all attempts at uniformity on the other. Its watchword is unity in diversity.48

Thus, the Bahá’í teachings affirm the capacity of individuals and humanity as a whole to develop behavior aimed at establishing constructiveness, cooperation, and agreement in social interactions. Such beneficial forces require that great attention and energy be devoted to the socialization of the individual ‎ through‎ a strong spiritual or moral education.

Moral Education[edit]

Human beings, according to the Bahá’í perspective, are fundamentally spiritual. But developing spiritual capacity requires moral education. Developing the spiritual side of humans is a comprehensive, life-long process. The Bahá’í writings are realistic in their assessment of the capacity of humans to pursue selfish motives or to inflict great harm on others. In the following passage, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá explains the deep roots of man’s self-centered tendency and prescribes spiritual education as a requisite for overcoming it:

[I]t is impossible for a human being to turn aside from his own selfish advantages and sacrifice his own good for the good of the community except through true religious faith. For self-love is kneaded into the very clay of man, and it is not possible that, without any hope of a substantial reward, he should neglect his own present material good. That individual, however, who puts his faith in God and believes in the words of God—because he is promised and certain of a plentiful reward in the next life, and because worldly benefits as compared to the abiding joy and glory of future planes of existence are nothing to him—will for the sake of God abandon his own peace and profit and will freely consecrate his heart and soul to the common good.49

48 Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 41–42. 49 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Secret of Divine Civilization, pp. 96–97. [Page 164]The Bahá’í teachings on spiritual education focus on training children from a young age in “goodly character and good morals,” and on guiding them to “all the virtues of humankind.”50 Spiritual education is centered on the development of that distinctive quality, the spiritual nature, which the Bahá’í teachings explain as being unique to human beings. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, in the following passage, explains the significance of raising children to have a strong spiritual constitution:

A child is as a young plant: it will grow in whatever way you train it. If you rear it to be truthful, and kind, and righteous, it will grow straight, it will be fresh and tender, and will flourish. But if not, then from the faulty training it will grow bent, and stay awry, and there will be no hope of changing it.51

This training is so important that the Bahá’í teachings assert, “Training in morals and good conduct is far more important than book learning.”52 This principle is further elucidated in the following passage:

A child that is cleanly, agreeable, of good character, well-behaved—even though he be ignorant—is preferable to a child that is rude, unwashed, ill-natured, and yet becoming deeply versed in all the sciences and arts. The reason for this is that the child who conducts himself well, even though he be ignorant, is of benefit to others, while an ill-natured, ill-behaved child is corrupted and harmful to others, even though he be learned. If, however, the child be trained to be both learned and good, the result is light upon light.53

Bahá’í child socialization aims to develop a prosocial orientation in children, who are encouraged to recognize themselves as members of a community that begins with the family and extends to include

50 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Selections from the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1997), p. 133.

51 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, in “Bahá’í Education,” in Compilation of Compilations, vol. I, p. 287.

52 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Selections, p. 143.

53 Ibid. [Page 165]all of humanity. Prosocial behavior is defined as the psychological mechanism of social action which includes helping, sharing, and caring for others. Bahá’í children are taught appreciation for the principle of unity in diversity and a respect for others regardless of race, class, or nationality; they are encouraged to develop a sense of personal spiritual responsibility to act toward others with compassion as well as justice and equity, and to sacrifice their own material self-interests for others in need. As adults, Bahá’ís are expected to make a commitment to continue internalizing such patterns until they become the foundation of the personality itself. Spiritual development is seen as an infinite process of self-transformation—that is, a continual, conscious refining of one’s behavior in the crucible of social interaction. The cultivation of spiritual, altruistic qualities remains the aim and central focus of life for the adult Bahá’í. Spiritual life is not separated from the realm of social relations but integrated with it. In this way, it becomes the means for authentic change that is positive and aimed at advancing society. The Universal House of Justice explains the distinctive significance of the spiritual nature of humans and its positive influence in history thus:

The endowments which distinguish the human race from all other forms of life are summed up in what is known as the human spirit; the mind is its essential quality. These endowments have enabled humanity to build civilizations and to prosper materially. But such accomplishments alone have never satisfied the human spirit, whose mysterious nature inclines it towards transcendence, a reaching towards an invisible realm, towards the ultimate reality, that unknowable essence of essences called God.54

Promoting the Welfare of Others[edit]

Shoghi Effendi explains that the breakdown in the present social conditions of the world is an outcome of the decline of true religion as a social force. He writes,

54 Universal House of Justice, Promise of World Peace, p. 5. [Page 166]The perversion of human nature, the degradation of human conduct, the corruption and dissolution of human institutions, reveal themselves, under such circumstances, in their worst and most revolting aspects. Human character is debased, confidence is shaken, the nerves of discipline are relaxed, the voice of human conscience is stilled, the sense of decency and shame is obscured, conceptions of duty, of solidarity, of reciprocity and loyalty are distorted, and the very feeling of peacefulness, of joy, and of hope is gradually extinguished.55

If human beings are responsible for the current degenerative condition facing society, they are, likewise, in a position to do something about it. Bahá’u’lláh describes the role of religion as a social force with the capacity to promote the good of society but also warns about its capacity to harm. He states,

Religion is the greatest of all means for the establishment of order in the world and for the peaceful contentment of all that dwell therein.... The weakening of the pillars of religion hath strengthened the hands of the ignorant and made them bold and arrogant.... Religion is a radiant light and an impregnable stronghold for the protection and welfare of the peoples of the world, for the fear of God impelleth man to hold fast to that which is good, and shun all evil. Should the lamp of religion be obscured, chaos and confusion will ensue, and the lights of fairness, of justice, of tranquility and peace cease to shine. Know thou, that they who are truly wise have likened the world unto the human temple. As the body of man needeth a garment to clothe it, so the body of mankind must needs be adorned with the mantle of justice and wisdom. Its robe is the Revelation vouchsafed unto it by God.56

Religion, then, not only has the potential for, but also has a direct role in, the advancement of the moral order. Religious teachings can become the source for cohesion and solidarity in social relationships among all the cultures and peoples of the world. The individual can

55 Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 187.

56 Bahá’u’lláh, ibid., p. 186. [Page 167]become a positive force whose actions become the cause of the well-being of others. Shoghi Effendi explains,

Indeed, the chief reason for the evils now rampant in society is a lack of spirituality. The materialistic civilization of our age has so much absorbed the energy and interest of mankind, that people in general no longer feel the necessity of raising themselves above the forces and conditions of their daily material existence. There is not sufficient demand for things that we should call spiritual to differentiate them from the needs and requirements of our physical existence. The universal crisis affecting mankind is, therefore, essentially spiritual in its causes.57

The more fundamental moral or spiritual attributes that are at the heart of influencing society and advancing it from one that is purely materialistic to one that strikes a balance between the material and spiritual, are outlined by the Universal House of Justice as follows: “the virtues that befit human dignity are trustworthiness, forbearance, mercy, compassion, and loving-kindness towards all peoples.”58 It is through the application of these virtues in one’s daily life and through the work of Bahá’í institutions that real change can come about in human interactions. Such virtues belong to every person, since all are capable of internalizing them. It is through deeds that individuals take responsibility for a moral order.

Reciprocity and Altruism[edit]

Social relationships involve “requirements that must be met if groups are to survive and flourish.”59 Philip Selznick believes that these requirements include “leadership, communication, specialization, and symbolic affirmation of group identity.”60 But then there are other requirements that “generate moral obligations,” such as “maintaining

57 From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, 8 December 1935, in “Youth,” in Compilation of Compilations, vol. 2, p. 425.

58 Universal House of Justice, Promise of World Peace, p. 25.

59 Selznick, Moral Commonwealth, p. 97.

60 Ibid. [Page 168]order, protecting property, and facilitating cooperation.”61 As an example of such obligations, Selznick writes,

[A] norm of reciprocity (“people should help those who have helped them; people should not injure those who have helped them”) is, in one form or another, universally recognized. Such principles are not accidental developments. They are solutions to problems, rediscovered innumerable times as ways of dealing with ever-present demands of organization and solidarity.62

Although the norm of reciprocity appears to be universally recognized, its actual practice and implementation are impossible without a system that promotes the fundamentals of individual moral development. Reciprocity can be guaranteed only as a result of individual consciousness, internalization of spiritual values, and a social system that actively promotes and supports such values within its institutions. Only then can a moral order based on reciprocity evolve.

The Bahá’í writings describe the evolution of a moral order in language that places significant responsibility upon the individual in learning to distinguish between what is right and what is wrong. Bahá’u’lláh states, “We have counselled all people, in the most clear and eloquent language, to adorn their characters with trustworthiness and godliness, and with such qualities as are conducive to the elevation of man’s station in the world of being.”63

He asserts, “The betterment of the world can be accomplished through pure and goodly deeds, through commendable and seemly conduct.”64 A moral order, as envisaged in the Bahá’í writings, is possible provided that the means for mutual responsibility and a genuine concern and consideration for others in all social interactions are successfully developed among the members of society.

Reciprocity is a concept that is highly valued in the Bahá’í teachings. It is the one principle that aims to bring about true altruistic

61 Ibid. 62 Ibid. 63 Bahá’u’lláh, in “Trustworthiness,” in Compilation of Compilations, vol. 2, p. 332. 64 Bahá’u’lláh, cited in Shoghi Effendi, The Advent of Divine Justice (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1990), pp. 24–25. [Page 169]intentions in social interactions. It is an integral part of a system of social exchange based on return or giving back. It strives to bring about solidarity, a sense of duty to others. Altruism, the Latin root of which means “other,” is defined as unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others.65 In the social sciences, it is considered to be a highly multifaceted concept.66 Sociologists such as Auguste Comte, Emile Durkheim, and others have acknowledged the presence of altruism in society. In their book, The Altruistic Personality: Rescuers of Jews in Nazi Europe, Samuel and Pearl Oliner point out that “the act [of altruism] needs to be performed entirely for its own sake apart from any considerations of self-satisfaction, pleasure, or utility.”67 Thus, self-interest as an inherent trait of human beings is challenged and the notion “that human behavior can be motivated by self-transcendence” is upheld.68 Sociologist Helen Fein has developed a theory of “collective altruism,” suggesting that altruistic people “help persons outside their borders to whom they owe no conventional obligation” and whom they view as members within their own “universe of obligation.”69 Fein explains that for the altruistic person there is no “Other.”70

Two types of altruistic behavior are mentioned in the literature: universalistic or inclusive, and specialized or bounded. Lawrence A. Blum concludes, “The more inclusive the altruism, the more worth it has.”71 Selznick defines particularism as bounded altruism or “an ethic of commitment to individuals who matter because of the special connections they have, not because of their general characteristics. . . .”

65 Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, 9th ed.

66 For a more in-depth discussion of the roots of altruism see, Samuel P. Oliner and Pearl M. Oliner, The Altruistic Personality: Rescuers of Jews in Nazi Germany (New York: The Free Press, 1988).

67 Ibid., p. 5.

68 Ibid., p. 358 n. 5.

69 Helen Fein, Genocide: A Sociological Perspective (London: Sage Publications, 1993), pp. 65–66.

70 Ibid., p. 65.

71 Lawrence A. Blum, “Altruism and the Moral Value of Rescue: Resisting Persecution, Racism, and Genocide,” in Embracing the Other: Philosophical, Psychological, and Historical Perspectives on Altruism, ed. Pearl M. Oliner et al. (New York: New York University Press, 1992), p. 35. [Page 170]The ‘other’ to be regarded, for whom self-sacrifice is appropriate, belongs to one’s own family or community.”72 Universalism, or inclusive altruism, according to Selznick, is found when, “[i]n defining objects of moral concern, the special interests of persons and groups are set aside.”73 Selznick explains that with inclusive altruism, “people are classified according to such objective criteria as age, need, talent, or achievement, in the light of general policies or purposes, without considering the special claims of kinship or group affiliation. This is the morality of fairness, the familiar logic of the ‘rule of law.’”74 He describes the importance of inclusive altruism, stating,

[U]niversalism is a natural accompaniment to the formation of communities. As opportunities for cooperation are enlarged and their benefits perceived, the application of altruism is no longer limited to a small band of close relatives. Particularism is diluted as the community expands. More and more people are recognized, first as fellow-creatures and then as colleagues or members of the same in-group. In the modern nation-state the particularistic connotations of “citizen,” though far from lost, are greatly attenuated.75

The Bahá’í perspective is clearly more aligned with the inclusive or universal form of altruism. It correlates with the Bahá’í claim of the need for acceptance of the unification of all people, the consciousness that humanity has now reached the point where it must live as one human family because of the challenges and requirements of the age in which we live. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá elaborates on this theme:

The supreme need of humanity is cooperation and reciprocity. The stronger the ties of fellowship and solidarity amongst men, the greater will be the power of constructiveness and accomplishment in all the planes of human activity. Without cooperation and reciprocal attitude the individual member of human society remains self-centered, uninspired by altruistic purposes, limited

72 Selznick, Moral Commonwealth, p. 194. 73 Ibid. 74 Ibid. 75 Ibid., p. 195. [Page 171]and solitary in development like the animal and plant organisms of the lower kingdoms.76

Elsewhere, the Bahá’í writings explicitly delineate altruistic norms, holding in high regard those who “nurture altruistic aims and plans for the well-being of their fellow men.”77 Other teachings reflect the values and attitudes conducive to an altruistic orientation,78 including a sense of unity with and responsibility towards others beyond one’s own social group; a strong family orientation; emphasis on relationship rather than status; generosity; trustworthiness; appreciation of diversity; as well as ethical values of justice and caring.

It is noteworthy that both the ethical principles of justice and of caring—important motivators of altruistic behavior—are emphasized in the Bahá’í writings, where they are not viewed as contradictory or exclusive but as inseparably connected. Even when the ethic of justice is enjoined, it is usually as a practice to be performed out of concern for others. Justice is presented as the practice of equity, often linked with “safeguard[ing] the rights of the downtrodden.”79 The Bahá’í conception of justice means that all have a right to receive care.

Well over half a century before Carol Gilligan called attention to the complementarity of the “masculine” ethic of justice and the “feminine” ethic of caring,80 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá had written, “The Kingdom of God is founded upon equity and justice, and also upon mercy, compassion, and kindness to every living soul. Strive ye then with all your heart to treat compassionately all humankind.”81 Yet, He then qualified this statement, asserting that oppression must be opposed: “Kindness cannot be shown the tyrant, the deceiver, or the thief, because ... it maketh them to continue in their perversity as before.”82 Individuals are encouraged to develop their capacities

76 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 338. 77 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Selections, p. 72. 78 See Oliner and Oliner, Altruistic Personality, n. 66. 79 Bahá’u’lláh, Gleanings, p. 247. 80 Carol Gilligan, In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982). 81 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Selections, p. 158. 82 Ibid. [Page 172]in identifying those who are oppressors, whether they manifest this trait through physical force, dominance, terrorism, dishonesty, seduction, villainy, or evil. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s statement is clear in insisting that we are to withhold goodwill and kindness when faced with the demoralizing behavior of tyrants, deceivers, or thieves, since such foul behavior brings harm upon others and becomes the cause of distrust, oppression, and injustice. These violations of individual rights may not be tolerated under any circumstances within the context of a moral order.

Bahá’í Institutions and the Promotion of Altruism[edit]

The Bahá’í teachings recognize that the transformation of individuals into altruistic persons cannot take place outside the social context, which must provide a matrix for that transformation. Research has drawn attention to the importance of group norms in motivating moral behavior, whether directly, as a response to social expectations, or indirectly, as internalized personal norms.83 The findings of Oliner and Oliner further underscore what they refer to as the normocentric orientation in motivating the altruism of rescuers of Jews during World War II.84 Oliner and Oliner write: “[A] normocentric reaction is not rooted in direct connection with the victim, but rather in a feeling of obligation to a social reference group with whom the actor identifies and whose explicit and implicit rules he feels obliged to obey.”85

Such findings imply that not only must altruistic qualities be fostered in individuals, but a social framework must also be provided within which extensivity and altruism are highly valued and represent the norms of the group itself. The creation of such a society is inseparable from the development of individual altruistic personalities, for so long as groups value egocentrism, unfettered individualism, ethnocentrism, status seeking, dominance, and a materialistic

83 See J. Reykowski, “Motivation of Prosocial Behavior,” in Cooperation and Helping Behavior: Theories and Research, ed. V. J. Derlaga and J. ‎ Grzelak‎ (New York: Academic Press, 1982), pp. 355–75.

84 Oliner and Oliner, Altruistic Personality, pp. 199–209.

85 Ibid., p. 199. [Page 173]orientation, altruism will remain an exception to the rule, and the altruistic personality will appear as deviant in comparison to the rest of the group. In Bahá’í society this situation is reversed: altruism is not an aberrant behavior contrary to convention, because the normative expectations (which individuals are ultimately expected to internalize) are altruistic.

Where Bahá’í socialization and moral education are aimed at developing the spiritual side of the person, the Bahá’í administrative order (or Bahá’í institutions) seeks to advance spiritual values, principles and laws through formal means. Bahá’í institutions are viewed as an instrument through which the spirit of the teachings of Bahá’u’lláh is realized collectively. In sociological terms, these institutions constitute a rational system of moral agency. That is, as institutions they embody values beyond mere efficiency or technical excellence. Their aim is the creation of a new world civilization grounded in spiritual principles relevant to the needs of this age.

Bahá’u’lláh conceived the formation of Bahá’í institutions, and their functions and responsibilities are expounded upon in the writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi. These governing bodies promote the progress and development of the community through the application of spiritual principles and laws. Among their responsibilities are educational programs for children and adults, community devotional meetings, application and observance of Bahá’í laws and principles relevant to the rank and file of members, and the overall spiritual protection and well-being of the community as it advances towards the implementation of the goals of the Bahá’í religion. The goals are arrived at and outlined through a consultative (inclusive) system where the Universal House of Justice, being at the highest level of Bahá’í institutions, communicates its vision and plan to each national institution, referred to as the National Spiritual Assembly, and in turn, to the regional and local institutions, thus coordinating the work of the Bahá’í community at the global level.

Thus, in the Bahá’í view, it is through the individual practice as well as the institutionalization of the principle of unity in diversity that human society can evolve to an unprecedented level of cohesion and cooperation, and transcend the limitations implicit in the current state of separation and competitiveness. While the Bahá’í conception of unity in diversity should not be viewed as merely a [Page 174]version of liberal pluralism, the safeguarding and encouraging of diverse elements within the Bahá’í community is a major institutional principle. It is embedded within Bahá’í institutions through practices that, because they apply at all levels of administrative and community functioning—local, national, and international—require the participation and support of the entire Bahá’í community. Under liberal pluralism diverse groups lobby the power structure in order to ensure that their interests are represented, while in the Bahá’í community every individual, regardless of class, culture, gender, race, or nationality, is responsible for upholding and applying the spiritual principles and laws laid down by Bahá’u’lláh, which form the structure of a social order. In the Bahá’í context, there is only one community, which is united around the general teachings of Bahá’u’lláh. Through the application of these principles and laws the betterment of all members is realized and not simply a particular group or segment of society which aims to promote its own particularistic agenda.

Most prominent of these practices is consultation, a group decision-making process whose goal is to reach solutions to problems by consensus. Bahá’í consultation encourages the open and frank expression of diverse views on the topic under discussion, in an atmosphere of love and respect that also allows the “clash of differing opinions” that can strike the “shining spark of truth.”86 Each member of the consultative group has an equal right of expression, and no blocs or factions—or any subdivisions of the group—are permitted. Inseparable from the Bahá’í consultative process is the development of sensitivity and respect for the different voices whose expression of opinion may not fit into conventional or dominant cultural modes of communication. Since the group attempts to work towards consensus on an issue, voting only as a last resort, the process does not necessarily require reduction to duality: alternatives need ‎ not‎ be narrowed down to the two poles “for” and “against.” Instead, the consultative process itself, drawing on the interactive contributions of all its diverse members, is looked to as the creative source of new solutions.

86 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, quoted in Shoghi Effendi, Bahá’í Administration, p. 21. [Page 175]Consultation is regarded both as a method for generative decision making and conflict resolution and as an instrument for reinforcing the unity of a diverse group. It is the method by which the Bahá’í administrative institutions conduct the affairs of the Bahá’í community, but Bahá’ís are also encouraged to use consultation in all aspects of their lives, whether in the family, neighborhood, or workplace.

Another way in which Bahá’í administrative institutions are structured to implement unity in diversity involves practices intended to ensure the participation of minority ethnic populations. (The definition of what constitutes a "minority" is left to the discretion of the National Spiritual Assembly of each country.) "To discriminate against any race, on the ground of its being socially backward, politically immature, and numerically in a minority" is considered to be "a flagrant violation of the spirit" of the Bahá’í teachings.87 In principle, protecting the "just interests of any minority element within the Bahá’í community" and ensuring that all have the opportunity to contribute their perspectives to the collaborative efforts of the group are considered so important that representatives of minority populations "are not only enabled to enjoy equal rights and privileges, but they are even favored and accorded priority."88 Bahá’í communities are instructed that it is their duty to ensure that "Bahá’í representative institutions, be they Assemblies, conventions, conferences, or committees, may have represented on them as many of these divers elements, racial or otherwise, as possible."89

One way in which this principle is practiced is the minority tie rule of Bahá’í elections. In the course of elections for Bahá’í administrative institutional membership-elections that are conducted without nominations or campaigning and are decided by plurality vote if voting results in a tie between persons, one of whom represents a minority, "priority should unhesitatingly be accorded the party representing the minority, and this for no other reason except to stimulate and encourage it, and afford it an opportunity to further the interests of the community."90 In addition to its direct effect in

87 Shoghi Effendi, Advent of Divine Justice, p. 29. 88 Universal House of Justice, Messages from the Universal House of Justice, 1968-1973 (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1976), p. 49. 89 Shoghi Effendi, Advent of Divine Justice, p. 36. 90 Ibid. [Page 176]increasing minority representation in Bahá’í administrative institutions, the practice of this rule heightens the sensitivity of the group to its minority membership and reaffirms the group commitment to valuing and encouraging minority participation. For the individual Bahá’í, conceding a tie vote to the minority representative becomes a concrete opportunity to practice sacrifice of self-interest for the other, within a context of social approval.

Whether applied in community administration, in the family, in education, or in the economy, the Bahá’í principles and practices are viewed as catalysts whose application will ultimately bring about social transformation leading to the development of an altruistic global society. Such a society, in the Bahá’í context, begins with the individual striving daily toward personal transformation-the deliberate internalization of spiritual teachings incorporating altruistic, extensive values as personal norms. The Bahá’í teachings strive to imbue individuals with an inclusive orientation transcending-though not suppressing-other group loyalties and valuing the well-being of the entire planet and all its inhabitants. Throughout the Bahá’í writings, the vision imparted to the individual is that of a peaceful, just, and caring civilization whose foundation rests on the cornerstone of the unity of all human beings, a unity that is to be consolidated and protected by institutions that reflect and promote the principles of unity, equality, and altruistic service as normative expectations.

Conclusion[edit]

As a community whose membership includes individuals from virtually every race, class, religion, ethnicity, and nationality, Bahá’ís are laboring hard to bring about a global community based on constructive, altruistic social relationships. They believe that it is their duty to strive towards the establishment of a moral order in which the pernicious aspects of human nature are overcome by the positive, spiritual tendencies inherent in every individual. From the Bahá’í perspective, real change towards a cooperative, progressive global community requires that the spiritual framework of society become strengthened. Nothing, Bahá’ís believe, short of a legitimate commitment to the fortification of the spiritual nature of humans [Page 177]

OBLIGATION AND RESPONSIBILITY[edit]

can hope to bring true and lasting happiness to human existence. Janet and Peter Khan, in their book, Advancement of Women: A Bahá’í Perspective, explain,

To a Bahá’í, the ideal spiritual life does not conform to the traditional model of an individual engaged in solitary spiritual discipline, remote from interaction with other people and removed from the transactions of social life. Rather the Bahá’í teachings direct attention to the interactive relationship between individual and social development, calling for a holistic approach in which the actions of the individual and of the social organism mutually reinforce each other and give rise to evolutionary change.”

The Bahá’ís envision a world commonwealth in which, as described by Shoghi Effendi, “the consciousness of world citizenship, the founding of a world civilization and culture... continue indefinitely to progress and develop.” 92 In that civilization, as a result of the “practical consequence of the spiritualization of the world and the fusion of all its races, creeds, classes and nations, ”93 peace will be established.

91 Janet A. Khan and Peter J. Khan, Advancement of Women: A Bahá’í Perspective (Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1998), p. 7. 92 Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 163. 93 Ibid., p. 162.


Retrieved from "https://bahai.works/index.php?title=Bahá’í_World/Volume_31/Obligation_and_Responsibility_in_Constructing_a_World_Civilization&oldid=258823"