I know, I know. Its a bit of a shock. Some of you are on the waiting list, even as you read. Others have already gone and come back with a few hundred pictures. Well, if you just stay with me for a second more I’ll explain what I mean and why that’s a little known fact.
If you haven’t seen it yet, there is a neat little website created by the Baha’i World Centre entitled “Baha’i Pilgrimage”. I think its about time we had this because there are a lot of Baha’is who want to go to pilgrimage and many don’t know what the steps are or where to get information. But “Baha’i Pilgrimage” as the name of that website is a misnomer.
Part of this new website says:
“The first and supreme obligation of all Bahá’ís who visit the Holy Land is to pray and meditate in the Sacred Shrines of Bahá’u’lláh, the Báb and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. To receive this bounty of visiting the Holy Places at the Bahá’í World Centre is an inestimable privilege, infinitely precious to every Bahá’í pilgrim.”
This excerpt is implying that a Baha’i visitor to the Holy Land is a pilgrim and the “supreme obligation” of all Baha’is who go, is to visit the shrines of the three central figures of the Faith. While visiting and spending time in reverent meditation and prayer at those special places is the choice of every Baha’i, it is wrong to imply or state that this is Baha’i pilgrimage.
Why?
Well, for the simple reason that Baha’i pilgrimage was set down by Baha’u'llah in a tablet and He wrote that the sites or locations for it are:
As well, He went on to explain the rites and forms which a Baha’i must follow for pilgrimage. There was also some things which were made explicit which Baha’is don’t have to do for pilgrimage - like shaving one’s head, ala the Muslim tradition. You can find the relevant information in two separate Tablets, which are known collectively as the Suriy-i-Hajj (or the Tablets of Pilgrimage).
Baha’u'llah also mentions pilgrimage in the Kitab-i-Aqdas. There He explains that it is a duty for all Baha’is but that women are exempt from pilgrimage - please don’t misunderstand this. . .this does not mean that they are prohibited. And that either the House of the Bab in Shiraz or the House of Baha’u'llah in Baghdad will do (a Baha’i can decide which they prefer to go to or which is closer).
So why do Baha’is from all around the world go to Haifa and call it pilgrimage? The answer to that has several parts. First of all, after Baha’u'llah’s passing, Abdu’l-Baha wrote that Bahji was a site of visitation for Baha’is. He did not specify any specific rites or forms for this visitation. The second is that, currently, Baha’is simply can not perform pilgrimage (as written by Baha’u'llah) because those places, the very buildings Baha’u'llah referred to are either not there anymore, or they are not in the control/ownership of Baha’is. The House of the Bab in Shiraz was razed to the ground after the revolution, while there are sensitive and ongoing negotiations to regain title to the the House of Baha’u'llah in Baghdad. Of course, these buildings and sites will be rebuilt in the future to the exact original specifications which the Baha’is have kept.
It might help to settle the issue if we go back to the original words used when referring to pilgrimage. The word that Baha’u'llah used is ‘hajj’. Someone who performed ‘hajj’ in the Muslim tradition was called ‘Haji’ on his return. And actually, Persian/Arab Baha’is who performed pilgrimage were also known as ‘Haji’ (this would explain all the Haji So-and-so’s you read about in Nabil’s Narratives or other historical books). But for the most part they were considered Haji because they had visited Baha’u'llah in person and attained to His presence.
On the other hand, there is another word which is used to denote visitation (not pilgrimage!) and it is ‘ziyarat’. This word is much more general and it can even refer to going to visit your friend down the street (it is actually a very polite way of saying exactly that in Persian). All other special or holy places visited by Baha’is for reverent prayer and meditation (the apartment Abdu’l-Baha stayed in Paris, the House of Abbud and Abdu’l-a-Pasha, Mazrayi, the Maxwell house in Montreal, the Shrine of the Bab, the resting place of Abdu’l-Baha, etc.) are actually visitations. Not pilgrimages.
I’m trying to simplify something quite complex here and some may correctly object that the differences are not so clear cut (as ‘ziyarat’ and ‘hajj’). But whatever we decide to ultimately call them or whatever words we choose to use, we must acknowledge that there are two levels at work here. One which is prescribed explicitely by Baha’u'llah (as well as the Bab) and which involves very specific rites and actions to be performed, and another which is much more widely applicable to holy places and has not been mentioned by Baha’u'llah and has no specific rites or actions to be performed.
Am I splitting hairs here? Maybe to some. But I hope others see that all I’m trying to do is to separate truth from misconceptions and ignorance.
So why does the Universal House of Justice continue to use the English word ‘pilgrimage’ (the equivalent of ‘hajj’) when refering to trips made to the Holy Land? Beats me. Maybe you can ask them and then let us all know.
It is not that little know fact that the sites of bahá’í pilgrimage are the house of Baha’u'llah in Bagdad and the House of the Bab in Shiraz.
Nothing in the words “The first and supreme obligation of all Bahá’ís who visit the Holy Land is to pray and meditate in the Sacred Shrines of Bahá’u'lláh, the Báb and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. To receive this bounty of visiting the Holy Places at the Bahá’í World Centre is an inestimable privilege, infinitely precious to every Bahá’í pilgrim.” imply that the pilgrimage to the Holy Land is a supreme obligation. It simply states what is the obligation for those who visit the Holy Land, and how fortunate they are when they have a chance to do it. Period.
Such words could also apply to a visit to the houses of Baha’u’llah in Adrianopolis, in Mazindaran, and to many other places related to the history of the Faith.
I am sorry to say, but your reading seems to me like a distortion of what is written there. How would you like if I make a distortion of your post and state that you claim that visits to the Holy Land are of no use for they are no true pilgrimages?
By using the words “hajj”/”ziyarat” the writings emphasize the spiritual relevance of different pilgrimage/visiting spots (my personal interpretation, of course). I don’t see what is the problem of using the word “pilgrimage” to describe visits to the spot that somehow are related to the lives of the Central Figures of our Faith. The word “pilgrimage” can be used to describe any visit that has a religious or spiritual purpose. The Baha’i Pilgrimage site also includes several quotations from Shoghi Effendi where he uses the word “pilgrimage” to describe the visit to the Holly Land. Was he wrong?
What really beats me is why didn’t you ask the House of Justice about this issue! Why did you prefer to create some sort of polemics on this subject?
BTW: a great baha’i pilgrimage would last four months. I would start in Shiraz, then we would go Tehran and Mazindaran, then Bagdad, then Istambul and Edirne, and finally the Holy Land.
“The fourteenth glad tidings: To undertake journeys for the sake of visiting the tombs of the dead is not necessary. If those who have means and wealth should give to the House of Justice the amount which would otherwise be expended on such journeys, this would be acceptable and agreeable before God. Happy are those who accomplish!”
-Compilations, Baha’i Scriptures, p. 144
I always took the above quote to mean that a literal pilgrimage is not the true meaning. That an inner pilgrimage to those spiritual states in one’s soul is much more important.
How about this for another “little know fact”: NOTHING in the Baha’i Faith IS LITERAL for people who are spiritual in how they see the Universe. NOTHING is literal for people who understand “The Kingdom of Heaven is WITHIN YOU”!
This, however, requires more effort in the pilgrimage of one’s soul to God.
Sigmund,
We all know from the Íqán that the key to the interpretation of the Holy Writings is the emphasis on its symbolical meanings. However that does not mean that nothing is literal. Take for instance the word of Bahá’u'lláh: “Be unjust to no man, and show all meekness to all men.” Check the life of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá to see whether the above words of His father are literal or not.
Marco,
Good point! I spoke unclearly. What I meant was that the first level of meaning is, of course, always literal. No one can deny that. I meant that everything then ascends to ever higher and higher refined levels of spiritual meaning based upon the spiritual understanding of the soul.
This is precisely how Baha’u'llah interprets many of the scriptures of other religions in the Kitab-I-Iqan. That the meanings are not literal at all on the deepest truths of the human race.
That was what I was trying to say.
Marco,
I’m afraid you didn’t read what I wrote with enough attention. I didn’t say that those words quoted from the website imply “that the pilgrimage to the Holy Land is a supreme obligation.”
Here is what I did write:
“This excerpt is implying that a Baha’i visitor to the Holy Land is a pilgrim and the “supreme obligation” of all Baha’is who go, is to visit the shrines of the three central figures of the Faith. While visiting and spending time in reverent meditation and prayer at those special places is the choice of every Baha’i, it is wrong to imply or state that this is Baha’i pilgrimage.”
The problem with referring to a trip to the Holy Land as “pilgrimage” is that it is wrong, according to what Baha’u'llah explicitely said. Pilgrimage is to, either, the House of the Bab in Shiraz or to the House of Baha’u'llah in Baghdad. Period.
As for your question why have I not contacted the UHJ to ask about this issue? What makes you think I haven’t? Taking into account the fact that they move as fast as molasses on a January morning, I estimate that my great-grandchildren may receive a vague, half-hearted attempt at an answer.
Great read again, Bacquia. Your messages sound like the ones I remember reading in the very early days of Talisman. I didn’t know much back then, so most messages contained little known facts that I certainly didn’t know! But in addition to that, the messages were put together in a constructive and educative way and with real thought.
I think the blog medium is going to have its day now, and the discussion list medium is on the decline. The good thing about a blog over a discussion list is that opponents cannot steal your agenda. And people like yourself get to truly blossom.
Oops, sorry, Bacquia. I messed up there. The last comment was from me, Alison
Words
what a mess they make
Teaching and Giving the Message are used interchangable but are worlds apart.
Proclamation is not teaching its giving the message.
I’ve been to all the places mentioned, but until then I never used the word Haj, now I do.
They are two Pilgrimages in Haifa one the holy sites, the other the Bricks of the arc.
The Bricks are distracting
Fitz,
you may have visited Haifa, but unless from there you teleported to Shiraz or Baghdad you didn’t perform pilgrimage.
I do agree with you about the Arc terraces. I found them cold, almost sterile. They were cut, styled and controlled to such a degree that it felt almost plastic, not a living, breathing, alive “thing”. I have never felt less in tune with nature, while around trees and plants. The whole thing was just a kitsch ordeal one has to undergo on the way to the Shrine of the Bab.
Now there was a powerful experience (shrine). Perhaps sometime I’ll write about it.
Brent, would you please be so kind as to provide a reference?
I’m assuming it isn’t Kitab-i-Hearsay