Post Reply
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
6 years ago  ::  Apr 06, 2008 - 6:58PM #1
compx2
Posts: 426
I was hoping someone could offer a few possible interpretations of the following verse from the Kitab-i-Aqdas.

In a section called "Prohibitions" this is listed:

"xxxii. Growth of men's hair beyond the lobe of the ear."

Does anyone think this might allow long hair in men?

--Kent
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Apr 06, 2008 - 8:55PM #2
firestorminitiative
Posts: 498
the UHJ will say what such a para means, and it will say so infallibly.
in the meantime...the Verswe means nothing.
   and nowhere in the Aqdas or the 8th ishraq is given any room for people to wuibble about what is above their station.
    as noted around her a couple weeks ago, at a recent event i was in my pony tail stadning with an aBs member with his shaven head.
   becuaser the paras will be elucidated by the UHJ...if It chooses.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Apr 09, 2008 - 7:35AM #3
compx2
Posts: 426
Are you suggesting that a shaved head might also be prohibited by some verse?

--Kent
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Apr 09, 2008 - 8:10AM #4
avoran
Posts: 121
Yes, I believe you can find that out there somewhere, I don't remember where. And there is an amusing story about Haji somebody-or-other (the 'Angel of Carmel') cited in Taherzadeh's 4-vol. series that addresses this issue. But the main point FS is making, I believe, is that because neither law is binding yet it is premature to draw any conclusions.

I'm not sure I agree with him. I do agree that it's premature to make a big issue out of it, or to draw definitive conclusions - indeed, as fs says, only the UHJ can anyway draw definitive conclusions - and I can see that in a future state of society we can't yet imagine these laws might make intuitive sense in a way they don't right now. But I don't conclude that we should therefore feel it's wrong to wonder about the possibilities. :) Except, perhaps, in the light of what Baha'u'lah says about "the age in which ye exist". :)
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Apr 09, 2008 - 5:53PM #5
compx2
Posts: 426
"...neither law is binding yet it is premature to draw any conclusions."

Why not?

What laws aren't binding?

And about interpretations by the Universal House of Justice, I mean it says: Prohibitions: ... long hair.  Do you really want the House to rule that long hair means long hair?

--Kent
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Apr 10, 2008 - 12:06AM #6
N_to_the_avid
Posts: 6
I think what they meant was that you can't shave your head, etc. for religious reasons (monks, etc.). if you do it just for fun then it's okay. I could be wrong on this, but thats just my interpretation.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Apr 10, 2008 - 12:06AM #7
N_to_the_avid
Posts: 6
I think what they meant was that you can't shave your head, etc. for religious reasons (monks, etc.). if you do it just for fun then it's okay. I could be wrong on this, but thats just my interpretation.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Apr 10, 2008 - 4:57AM #8
avoran
Posts: 121
[Why not?]
Do you mean why not binding or why premature? The answer to the first is because the UHJ explicitly said so (see below). The answer to the second, as I understand it, is implied by the House in the introduction to the Kitab-i-Aqdas:

"The society for which certain of the laws of the Aqdas are designed will come only gradually into being, and Baha'u'llah has provided for the progressive application of Baha'i law..."
(p. 5)

[What laws aren't binding?]
Do you have Ocean? If so, look up "Applicability of the Laws and Ordinances of the Kitab-i-Aqdas" "8 February 2001". If you don't have Ocean I can post the letter for you.

[Do you really want the House to rule that long hair means long hair?]
Just to pull one possibility out of a hat, it might rule that this is only applicable to certain age groups - "men" as opposed to "youth", for example. Until it's clear what the law is for we can't know anything for sure.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Apr 10, 2008 - 9:23AM #9
compx2
Posts: 426
"Applicability of the Laws and Ordinances of the Kitab-i-Aqdas" "8 February 2001".

Thank you for the reference.  Only a few laws are not applicable, but included are these:
--------------------------
IV.D.1.y,xxv,xxx,xxxi & xxxii

The laws prohibiting the use of the type of pools which used to be found in persian baths, the plunging of one's hand in food, the shaving of one's head and the growth of men's hair below the lobe of the ear.

(The Universal House of Justice, 2001 Feb 08, Laws of the Aqdas not yet Universally Applied)
-------------------

"...it might rule that this is only applicable to certain age groups - "men" as opposed to "youth", for example. "

I don't think any of the laws apply to those who are under the age of maturity, or those who have not specifically accepted the Baha'i Faith.

--Kent
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Aug 26, 2008 - 9:55PM #10
Mzargarov
Posts: 3
Look at the photos of 'Abdu-l Baha.
He always wore his hair LONG!
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook