From: bavafa@netcom.com (Hooshyar Naraghi)
Subject: What to read at sci
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 07:51:46 GMT
Organization: me 2

In article <1992Jul24.135945.3249@fmg.bt.co.uk> ghbr@fmg.bt.co.uk (Hossein Bagherzadeh Rafsanjani) writes:
>In article <TOWFIQ.92Jul22084356@nighthawk.clearpoint.com>
>towfiq@nighthawk.clearpoint.com (Mark Towfiq) writes:

salam Agha Hossein, it was nice to hear from you again.  How is Intelligent
Service these days!?  Any rumors about their "towte'eh" (gee how do you write
this word in English, that is conspiracy) as what the next step is, of course
after we Baha'is completely take over sci.  Please excuse my sarcasm as an
opening.  I was simply kidding for the 'humor-impaired' readers. [(c) mack 92]

>[A long article containing words of wisdom from "Baha'u'llah" deleted.]
>
>>   Baha'u'llah did perform many miracles during His life, such as
>> physical healing, raising people from being physically dead, and so
>> on.  
>
>Oh, if only we had more of these "physical-healers" and "dead-raisers" around!
>We would have less miseries in the world (assuming they didn't raise the wrong
>people from dead :-)), and they would also help to unify the world in a big
>family of like-minded harmonious non-political and peaceful people :-)

Nice satirical comments!  I liked it.

>>   I hope this is the beginning of an answer to your question.
>                       ^^^^^^^^^
>
>Oh, no, please! I have been consoling myself that I haven't lost much from our
>temporary break from the news and the erratic way of receiving it lately, just
>because most of it has been filled-up by our Baha'i friends so keen to
>enlighten us by their wisdoms. Now, it seems that every (new or old) question,
>sincere or not, is going to be responded by a flood of articles and quotations
>So, a humble plea to our Baha'i friends: Could you please, whenever you find 
>an urge to respond to a comment or question (and quote streams of wisdom) do
>either of the following:
>
>	Refer the poster to soc.cuture.bahai (or may be a FAQ file), and
>	give the detailed answers there;
>
>	Respond by mail to the poster, and say so (if you wish) on the news.

Dear Hossein, with all due respect please refrain from pleaing guidelines in
this newsgroup.  The name of this group is soc.culture.iranian.  The charter
of this forum is to discuss "things" Iranian including but not limited to 
cultural, political, ethnical, and religious.  At sci questions are asked and
some people choose to reply, as much as some people choose to hit a special
key on the keyboard.  Behnam has made a valid point that I humbly agree with
and that was no netter is obligated to answer in this newsgroup, as much as
no netter is restricted from posting an article in this newsgroup, be it an
answer or refutation, a theological argument or 'estenAd' to a hadith, or
"anything" else for that matter.

The present Baha'i discussion has been conducted by a large number of netters
including several people - Baha'i and non-Baha'i - who had not posted to sci as
frequently as before.  I submit that your characterization that Baha'is are
flooding this newsgroup by every 'word of wisdom' they get their hands on is
inaccurate becuase the exchange has been a mutual one in that it has included
many people with many different backgrounds and ideaological beliefs.  

Furthermore, please note that it is very natural to see more Baha'i writings
and references to Baha'i scriptures during this discussion, because the topic
is the Baha'i Faith.  We have witnessed one exception to my observation above
and that has been the exchange of discussions conducted by Kamram Hakim and
Behnam Sadeghi during which numerous references to Islamic scriptures and
documents have been cited.  Now, does such a discussion imply that these two
souls have flooded SCI with Islamic words?  The answer is people believe what
they want to believe.  If _you_ harvested that the numerous quotations from
Baha'i scriptures meant to launch 'religious propaganda exercises' as you have
us believe, then 1) I am the first to respect it although I might not agree
with its contents, 2) it is _your_ 'bardAsht.'  I am at loss as how you chose
to ascribe _your_ conclusions to Baha'is.  I hope you will be more meticulous
next time you post an article so that you can be clear as to state what _you_
think the situation looks like as supposed to what the _real_ situation is.

It would be understandable if several netters did not find the current tread
about the Baha'i Faith to their taste, but this freedom of choice does not
give them the right to stop people from posting.  'AghA agar ja nadAri, az
avval bego.' If you are disappointed that SCI has been handling more of posts
related to the Baha'i Faith, say so from beginning, but please do not advocate
that posters should stop posting.  There is nothing wrong to suggest that the
current tread is not interesting to me or group of people.  There is every
thing wrong to plea or even indirectly ask people to stop posting, because I 
happen to be the one who does not like the topic at hand.

>This way, you won't waste too much of band-width, won't look too pushy in your
>propoganda (and not be seen as doing something "political"), won't generate
>comments like mine above (on healing etc!), won't derive away readers from thi
>newsgroup who are fed-up with all these (forget my expression) naive and stupi
>religious propoganda exercises, look more respectable all round - and help to
>keep the SCI family more at peace with each other.

I am sorry to read the above association.  My friend, the bandwidth is taken
by all those souls who _chose_ to participate in this discussion.  It was and
it is their privilege to do so.  I am disappointed to hear from you that you
somehow associated all those waste of bytes to Baha'is, i.e., 'us.'  Of course
you might have done a homework and measured those bytes on the topic of the
Baha'i Faith at SCI, and realized that 'we' took 57% and the rest of netters 
took 40% of the bandwidth (leaving the 3% for other topics), in which case I 
would venture to say please furnish me with some numbers, and then I would
thank you for your efforts and contest _SO WHAT_!?

I am very concerned about the implications of your 'plea' above.  SCI does
not belong to Baha'is or Moslems or 'bidinAn' or any group labeled as
something.  SCI transcends beyond these categorizations.  I would like to
suggest that such dangerous categorizations and isolationist remarks would
advance the cause of driving away readers from this newsgroup, and help keep
the SCI family less at peace with each other.  

Once again, Hossein jan, I am not saying you meant what I have illustrated
above.  I am simply bringing it to your kind attention that _I_ felt the
evil of discrimination when I read your post.  It shut me up; it silenced me.
 
I felt that way because you said:
 
'This way [your proposed plea to Baha'is to take away Baha'i topics from sci,
HFN]
. . . you won't generate comments like mine above (on healing etc), won't
derive away readers from this newsgroup who are fed-up with all these naive
and stupid religious propaganda exercises, look more respectable all round - 
and help to keep the SCI family more at peace with each other.'

'bAbA, goli be gooshey-e jamAlet!'  Now I have to shut up so that _you_
won't generate satirical comments like healing?  Now because I discussed
Baha'i matters at SCI I drove away readers from this newsgroup, who _you_
have assumed are fed up with all these naive and stupid exercises?  BTW,
it was _you_ who believed these were naive and stupid exercises; I NOT.

Now I should not involve myself in discussing Baha'i subjects at SCI, although
they were originated and initiated by a lot of people at sci?  Now I should
silence myself in order to look more respectable all round?  Now I should
take my words of wisdom somewhere else in order to keep the SCI family from
falling apart?  Now I am responsible for not keeping this family at peace with
each other?  I repeat my friend: 'bAbA, goli be gooshey-e jamAlet.'

This what Patricia Williams refers to 'Victim Responsibility' in her book
called 'The Alchemy of Race and Rights,'  I highly recommend the book to 
those who are interested to learn about the tricks of discrimination specially
racial kinds of it.  So far we were bad guys and because of that we were being
killed in Iran, now it is our responsibility to maintain peace and harmony
at SCI and among the family members of SCI by not posting Baha'i articles to
SCI.  Fascinating, indeed'

I have read your posts before, and I thought you were an open-minded person.
Unfortunately, this post of yours left me with the impression that I smelled a
lot of discriminatory signals.  I would reserve the position that I might
have misunderstood your post, in which case please accept my apologies in
advance.  It just happens that your post had a very strong signal to isolate
a group of people from SCI because they discussed topics of "Iranian" nature.
I humbly brought it to your attention thinking that you were not contemplating
about the implications of your statement when you posted it.

Happy peaceful family.

Regards,
Hooshyar F. Naraghi
bavafa@netcom.com
(415) 324-1055

>-hossein
>
>P.S.  However, I urge you to respond to questions (and misrepresentations)
>about HISTORICAL FACTS or cultural aspects of the Baha'i community.

I see, so there are exceptions to the plea.  Because _you_ happen to like
historical facts or cultural aspects, you do urge Baha'is to respond.  Wait
a minute, I am getting it now.  Isn't this plea of yours originating from the
fact that Mark Towfiq talked about religious healing miracles that happen
to be a topic not favored by you :-)

>Poems by Qorrat-ol-Ein for instance? Or her bold campaigns for women's rights?

Was it you who few months ago stated that in your opinion religions had not
contributed anything to the progress of human civilazations?  Now if by 
_your_ granting I post few nice poems from Tahereh or share with you her
campaigns toward liberation of Iranian women, how would you characterize her
actions?  Would you say she was influenced by the message of the new religion?
I bet 10 pounds NOT!

=============================  for beloved Zafar only  =======================
Please, please, please, Zafar have mercy on me.  Don't go around and reveal to
everyone that I bet money with Hossein while according to Baha'i Faith betting
is harum so Baha'u'llah is contradicting himself.  You see it's me doing it, 
not the Baha'i Faith :-)
==============================================================================

>Hooshyar, are you related to Molla-Ahmad-e Neraghi (writer of Me'raaj-os-Sa'aadeh)?
>Was he (or did he become) a Baha'i?  I am curious.

I can't say.  I do not know the name you mentioned.  I checked with my father
who is the oldest member of the family and he had not heard of such name.  Can
you tell us more about him or his book, if you know him more than his name or
hisk book?

A poem by tAhereh follows, regardless of the outcome of the bet!  Enjoy it.


dar rah-e eshghat ey sanam, shiftey-e balA manam
                          chand moghAyerat koni, bA ghamat AshenA manam
pardeh beroy basteh-ee, zolf beham shekasteh-ee
                          az hameh khalgh rasteh-ee, az hamegAn jodA manam
shir to-ee, shekar to-ee, shAkheh to-ee, samar to-ee
                          shams to-ee, ghamar to-ee, zarreh manam, habA manam
nakhl to-ee, rotab to-ee, lo'bat-e noosh-e lab to-ee
                          khAjey-e bA-adab to-ee, bandey-e bi-adab manam
ka'beh to-ee, sanam to-ee, deyr to-ee, haram to-ee
                          delbar-e mohtaram to-ee, Ashegh-e binavA manam
shAhed-e shookh-e delbarA, goft besooy-e man biyA
                          rasteh ze kebr-o az riyA, mazhar-e kebriyA manam
tAhereh khAk-e pAy-e to, mast-e mey-e laghAy-e to
                          montazer-e atAy-e to, mo'taref-e khatA manam
Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian