The first and most important point that must be made when talking about validity and quality of Ruhi is that it is based upon a foundation of implied assumptions. These are that a systematic and standardaized curriculum is best – or atleast, better. I can not overstate how important, yet silent, assumptions these are. I have never really seen anyone point them out or to question them. Instead they are unblinkingly accepted. I do question these assumptions and wonder why such a fundamental element of Ruhi is never discussed. My take on this is that it isn’t because it can not withstand intellectual scrutiny.
I have no doubt that Ruhi met with great success when it was first introduced in Columbia. Arbab created something which worked great teaching and consolidating poor and semi-literate Baha’is in the rural communities of Latin America. Unfortunately, with these initial successes, the man with a hammer began to see the whole world as a nail.
The whole essence of Ruhi is taqlid (blind and unquestioning imitation in action or belief). At the time of Baha’u'llah this was a big deal since much of Shi’ite doctrine (and the orthodox authority of the Mullah’s and Mutjahid) rested on taqlid. Baha’u'llah instructs Baha’is to put it aside and instead use individual investigation of truth. We have anectodal evidence (where Baha’u'llah admonishes a student for parroting the teachers lesson and then rewards him when he comes to a personal understanding and puts the lesson in his own words) as well as explicit texts which condemn taqlid.
Another negative aspect of Ruhi is that it has a strong crowding out effect in every community that it is implemented. Each person and each community has a finite amount of time, energy, money, etc. And when we devote our resources in one direction, we are simultaneously denying them to any other area. Since the Baha’i community has been pushed into doing the sequence of Ruhi courses they have very little resources to devote elsewhere. Like the Mashriq’ul-Adhkar, charitable and SED projects, deepenings, teaching projects and the like. I’ve even seen some groups take it over and over again in a sort of crazy Groundhog Day scenario.
Putting aside all that, the strongest argument against Ruhi is its own content. It is a jumble of authenticated Baha’i texts (from the writings of the central Figures), pilgrims notes (which have dubious historical accuracy) and the commentary and interpretation of the editors and creators of the Ruhi courses themselves. What’s more, no distinction is made between these differing sources. Also non-existent is any sort of context for the quotes. The student is expected to treat them all the same way, that is read, write in the questions, repeat, and memorize.
Yet, for all of its flaws, in a very short time Ruhi managed to become sacrosanct. The how and the whys of this are rather simple. It is the only such program mentioned repeatedly by name by the House of Justice and the ITC in their official communiques. Actually it is not only mentioned by the highest Baha’i institutions, it is strongly recommended and aggressively promoted by them. The NSAs, LSAs and individual Baha’is in turn take these cues for what they are.
For these same reasons, any criticism of the weaknesses of Ruhi is interpreted as a direct criticism or attack on the House of Justice and the ITC. This has resulted in a situation where, as a Baha’i, you either get with the program or are branded as covenantally weak. The poisonous effects of this on the Baha’i world community are already apparent and will be even more pronounced with time.
For some other ideas on Ruhi, you can read this essay by Anthony Lee.
From the Ruhi Course To the Collaborators (if you are unfamiliar with Ruhi vocabulary, this refers to any and all who participate in the Ruhi program, either as students or as teachers – er, sorry…tutors):
“It is natural that a verse from the Writings should bring to mind myriads of noble and beautiful ideas. To share these ideas with the friends on appropriate occasions conduces to joy and happiness. But care must be exercised so that this practice does not become an exercise in the expression of ego and an insistence on the sovereignty of personal opinion.”
Interesting. Especially when you consider the elevated station that the individual’s conscience has in the Baha’i writings. Also interesting when you consider that individual investigation of truth is a major tenet of the Baha’i Faith. I also wonder what role ego has to play when the writers of Ruhi, without any distinction, comingle their own words and understanding with the sacred texts and impose on the students to study and memorize them in the same way.
The experience of the Ruhi Institute has shown that we do not suppress the imagination or the personality of the participants when we refrain from posing questions such as, “What does this mean to you?”
Not only is this never shown by the Ruhi Institute to be the case, the anecdotal evidence contradicts it:
This reminded me of an experience last summer: several Baha’is and guests were gathered for a monthly potluck social. A relatively new believer came into the drive, leapt from his car, stormed over to our group by the barbeque- obviously agitated. In a firm voice he said: “I will NOT be indoctrinated!” It took a bit of consoling to arrive at the source of his distress. As a new believer he had been encouraged to participate in a Ruhi Book I study circle. He explained that he was so insulted by the “shallowness” of the material that he couldn’t take it any more and walked out…
Unfortunately, since the same group (Arbab, Correa, Lample, etc.) that created and promoted Ruhi are now in the highest positions within the Baha’i Administration, it will be long time until we put it all behind us. For this small group of persons, there is just too much personal interest at stake. I can empathize. Its never easy to admit that one is wrong. That’s just human. But usually when we fall prey to this defect of human nature, it is only ourselves that we hurt. But in the case of Ruhi, the whole Baha’i community is suffering.
Related:
Check out Alison’s post on taqlid.
