criticism and its limits
Editorial introduction
Why notice the mote in a brother’s eye and not the beam in one’s own? ‘Abdu’l-Bahá begins the question of criticism there, with justice toward oneself, and then treats speech as a medicine: the same word that awakens a multitude can, in another mouth or at another moment, turn an eager seeker cold. Yet candour is not the enemy of unity; it is its instrument. Shoghi Effendi calls it not merely the right but the vital responsibility of every loyal believer to offer frank criticism to an Assembly, and the Universal House of Justice asks how consultation could be honest without critical thought, while insisting that motive, manner and love weigh as heavily as the right to speak, and that a community needs a wide margin for mistakes. The Buddha’s discourse to Prince Abhaya adds a third test beside truth and benefit: the right time to say a hard thing [1]. The path from here leads into the diversity of thought and belief, the unity that does not require uniformity, and the balance of spirit and form in the administration.
We must be just. We must not speak with our eyes closed to our own shortcomings and expatiate on those of others. 'Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?'
Consider how through their negative words, some can change an eager seeker into one disinterested and indifferent. Yet sometimes, just a single word causes guidance and the awakening of a multitude. At times a medicine can cure a patient, and at other times, the same can cause his demise.
The language of criticism and fault-finding is bad. It has become however the second nature in some people. All these evils are issued from self-adulation and personal conceit.
However, the language was somewhat harsh - if the expressions were more moderate it would be better. The magazine should be universally recognized as a herald of truth and benevolence, such that its mere hints would be equivalent to profound complaints. For instance, if it writes of someone that "this person deserves careful attention," this phrase should be equivalent to a book of complaints, such that readers would conclude that clearly this person must be extremely offensive, murderous and oppressive for Khurshid to make such an allusion.
There is a school of philosophers today in Europe who deny not only the authenticity of the Bible but who claim that there is not such a Person as Jesus Christ. This is an ideal Christ invented by the apostles. Moreover the Evangelists in writing the Gospels stole away the utterances of the ancient sages and attributed them to this ideal Christ. All these are mere statements. They cannot prove them.
O my companion! The theme of this treatise is of great significance and its argument as manifest as a blazing banner. No censure, however, is permissible towards any of the ruling sovereigns, neither as indications, nor as hints, nor even as subtle allusions. For this is a matter explicitly recorded in the Book and it is not permissible to deviate from the explicit Text.
Further quotations · supplied wording and references
Because the Most Great Peace is the object of our longing, a primary effort of the Baha'i community is to reduce the incidence of conflict and contention, which have categorically been forbidden in the Most Holy Book. Does this mean that one may not express critical thought? Absolutely not. How can there be the candour called for in consultation if there is no critical thought?
...you had asked whether the believers have the right to openly express their criticism of any Assembly action or policy: it is not only the right, but the vital responsibility of every loyal and intelligent member of the Community to offer fully and frankly, but with due respect and consideration to the authority of the Assembly, any suggestion, recommendation or criticism he conscientiously feels he should in order to improve and remedy certain existing conditions or trends in his local Community, and it is the duty of the Assembly also to give careful consideration to any such views submitted to them by any one of the believers.... But again it should be stressed that all criticisms and discussions of a negative character which may result in undermining the authority of the Assembly as a body should be strictly avoided.
It is indeed the inalienable right of every recognized believer to express himself, during all such occasions, on the manner in which community affairs in general are conducted, and to offer the Assembly any views or recommendations he has on the subject. But in the exercise of such right he should refrain from any such remarks or actions as would tend to belittle the significance and undermine the authority of the Assembly itself, as an institution established by Baha'u'llah.
A wide latitude for action must be allowed them, which means that a large margin for mistakes must also be allowed. … Related to this is the tendency of the friends to criticize each other at the slightest provocation, whereas the Teachings call upon them to encourage each other. Such tendencies are of course motivated by a deep love for the Faith, a desire to see it free of any flaw. But human beings are not perfect. The Local Assemblies and the friends must be helped through your example and through loving counsel to refrain from such a pattern of criticism, which stunts the growth and development of the community.
If we disapprove of their decisions we must be careful to avoid discussing such matters with other believers who have no authority to put them right.
All should be ready and willing to set aside every personal sense of grievance -- justified or unjustified -- for the good of the Cause, because the people will never embrace it until they see in its community life mirrored what is so conspicuously lacking in the world: love and unity. The Baha'is are fully entitled to address criticisms to their Assemblies; they can freely air their views about policies or individual members of elected bodies to the Assembly, Local or National, but then they must whole-heartedly accept the advice or decision of the Assembly, according to the principles already laid down for such matters in Baha'i administration.
Clearly, then, there is more to be considered than the critic's right to self-expression; the unifying spirit of the Cause of God must also be preserved, the authority of its laws and ordinances safeguarded, authority being an indispensable aspect of freedom. Motive, manner, mode, become relevant; but there is also the matter of love: love for one's fellows, love for one's community, love for one's institutions. … For vital as it is to the progress of society, criticism is a two-edged sword: it is all too often the harbinger of conflict and contention.
As believers with various insights into the Teachings converse -- with patience, tolerance and open and unbiased minds -- a deepening of comprehension should take place. The strident insistence on individual views, however, can lead to contention, which is detrimental not only to the spirit of Baha'i association and collaboration but to the search for truth itself. Beyond contention, moreover, is the condition in which a person is so immovably attached to one erroneous viewpoint that his insistence upon it amounts to an effort to change the essential character of the Faith.
There are numerous individuals who share the ideals of the Faith and draw inspiration from its Teachings, while disagreeing with certain of its features, but those who actually enter the Baha'i community have accepted, by their own free will, to follow the Teachings in their entirety, understanding that, if doubts and disagreements arise in the process of translating the Teachings into practice, the final arbiter is, by the explicit authority of the Revealed Text, the Universal House of Justice.
As to the problem which has arisen in connection with the News Letter published and circulated by the Boston Assembly, the Guardian has already written about it to your N.S.A., expressing the view that under no circumstances should any local Assembly be given the right to criticize and much less oppose, the policy duly adopted and approved by the N.S.A. It is his hope that henceforth the problem of the relationship between the N.S.A. and the local Assemblies in matters of this nature will, in the light of his instructions, be carefully understood by individuals and Assemblies alike.
They seem -- many of them -- to be prone to continually challenging and criticizing the decisions of their Assemblies. If the Baha'is undermine the very leaders which are, however immaturely, seeking to coordinate Baha'i activities and administer Baha'i affairs, if they continually criticize their acts and challenge or belittle their decisions, they not only prevent any real rapid progress in the Faith's development from taking place, but they repel outsiders who quite rightly may ask however expect to unite the whole world when we are so disunited among ourselves!
While constructive criticism is encouraged, destructive criticism, such as the pattern of "continually challenging and criticizing the decisions" of the Assemblies, prevents the rapid growth of the Faith and repels those who are yet outside the community. … "Vicious criticism is indeed a calamity", the root of which is "lack of faith in the system of Baha'u'llah" and failure to follow the "Baha'i laws in voting, in electing, in serving, and in abiding by Assembly decisions".
Those who from time to time express their dissatisfaction with the current structure of the Administrative Order would be better advised to turn their attention to a thorough study of the principles upon which it is based, as expounded by 'Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi, and to concentrate their efforts on putting into practice the spirit and letter of these texts. Virtually every problem which is blamed on a deficiency of structure is, in fact, traceable to a defect in the manner in which the individual believers understand and implement the administrative principles of the Faith.
When criticism and harsh words arise within a Baha'i community, there is no remedy except to put the past behind one, and persuade all concerned to turn over a new leaf, and for the sake of God and His Faith refrain from mentioning the subjects which have led to misunderstanding and inharmony. The more the friends argue back and forth and maintain, each side, that their point of view is the right one, the worse the whole situation becomes. When we see the condition the world is in today, we must surely forget these utterly insignificant internal disturbances, and rush, unitedly, to the rescue of humanity.
There are, no doubt, always grounds for criticism. The Baha'is are not perfect, and are not able, at present at least, to put into practice all the things they stand for. However, he feels that if you compare them to the people of the world in general, you will find a high average of sincerity and dedication to a great ideal, and a tangible effort being made on their part to live up to that which they preach. As time goes by, and there are larger communities of Baha'is believing in the same things, it will obviously become easier for them to put them into community practice.
But the only way, or perhaps I should say the first and best way, to remedy such situations, is to oneself do what is right. One soul can be the cause of the spiritual illumination of a continent. Now that you have seen, and remedied, a great fault in your own life, now that you see more clearly what is lacking in your own community, there is nothing to prevent you from arising and showing such an example, such a love and spirit of service, as to enkindle the hearts of your fellow Baha'is.
For thought and discussion