Linking Esperantism with the Bahá’í Faith is more than an avocation for me! So, I’ve penned a few lines on the subject which in no way purport to project an official position on the part of either movement. Don’t shoot the messenger, mes amis! My young sons would grieve terribly for their old papa. Do please weigh in though to refute, confute or even to dispute to a degree; a few of our coreligionists have tried – unsuccessfully as yet – and we’re all cool about that!  

No rational being expects perfection when an amateur takes up the pen. Please feel free to correct the penpersonship of this scrivener, especially in regard to a forty-page bilingual booklet, as an FB2B-enclosure profiling the Bahá’í Faith, and to a Seminar paper consisting of three dozen pages vis-à-vis the position of the Universal House of Justice on language; it starts on page 33 of From Babel to Bahá’í (FB2B). Though some contractual obligations are complex and restricting, a handy facet of electronic publishing at Gumroad (San Francisco) is the ease in which authors facilitate emending and polishing of their work:  

At long last then From Babel to Bahá’í – whose initial goal is to promote consultation on the principle of a universal auxiliary language en route to (hopefully!) Esperantizing six or seven million Bahá’ís, a process which will vastly accelerate propagation of the Faith to all and sundry – is finally ready. My latest book on the language principle starts with a Biblical warning regarding the sin of pride at Babel and closes with a sterner Divine chastisement restated for our era as Rome burns badly and society implodes before unbelieving eyes:

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, (cxxxii): “Purpose of the one true God…”   

   

THE FINAL WARNING – “WHOSE FLAMES NONE CAN QUENCH”                

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, (clix): “Attain unto Perfect Liberty…”

Writing in 1946 in an official capacity, Shoghi Effendi, as head of the Faith and its sole Guardian, advised the western world’s primary Baha’i administrative centre, in Chicago: Heartily approve nation-wide observance for dauntless Lidia Zamenhof. Her notable services, tenacity, modesty and unwavering devotion fully merit high tribute from American believers. Her death is a great loss, as she was so well able to serve and to teach in different languages and different countries. It seems too terrible to contemplate what her end must have been!           

‘Splendid, authoritative and comprehensive’ is Shoghi Effendi’s awesome description in God Passes By (GPB, 1970, p382) of Dr. Esslemont’s classic, Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era (BNE), cited above with its resounding ‘must’. (BNE, 2006, p. 182), (*pp45-47) In reference to the very next paragraph thereof (p. 183), not penned by Esslemont but stating with some institutional backing that “the Bahá’í Faith is not committed to Esperanto…”, you’ll notice that all of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s instructions re Esperanto are, without limitation as to timeliness, directed at Bahá’ís as individuals and without reference to the selection question which remains to this day, as it was in his, an institutional matter to be taken up in due course by the parliaments of the world and the Universal House of Justice. (*pp40,37,42) The Master is cited way out of context from page 95 of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in London in support of this institutional stance found in recent editions of BNE that the Faith as a religious organisation is not committed at present to any living or artificial tongue: "The love and effort put into Esperanto will not be lost but no one person can construct a Universal Language.” Refer please to my main work (*pp48,49) and more pointedly to pages 22 and 23 of Making World Peace Real - The Principle of a Universal Auxiliary Language # http://www.bandeeducation.com in which I explain in detail the long-term harm of misunderstanding context and the questioner’s inquiry about a universal tongue, not a universal auxiliary language. Irony arises too in that ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in London answered an inquiry about a universal language; the word ‘auxiliary’ makes no appearance. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá responded to a question not directly linked to a fundamental principle of the Faith nor to Esperanto’s potential role therein, but rather to the following words of Bahá’u’lláh when a single planetary language of “a far distant time” will rule: “We have formerly ordained that people should converse in two languages, yet efforts must be made to reduce them to one, likewise the scripts of the world, that men’s lives may not be dissipated and wasted in learning divers languages. Thus the whole Earth would come to be regarded as one city and one land.” (Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh, section entitled Eighth Leaf of the Exalted Paradise, p68) (#p23) (*p73) A special characteristic of Bahá’í administration, which in the case of the holy text itself is not allowed, is its flexibility enabling additions and retractions re its own pronouncements according to the exigencies of the time. (*p40) Again, clearly, as evidenced by this updated and irrefutable understanding of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s words in London, revision or removing of the non-Esslemont wording in question in BNE is a most pressing consideration for future generations. The Bahá’í International Community’s (BIC, New York) 1995 and 2004 emphasis on “we are not the protagonists of any one language” (FB2B pages 27-30) gives rise to the grave issue underpinning the snow-balling effect that these century-long misunderstandings cause concerning its statements on language and even in regard to the personal views of countless Bahá’ís of influence and capacity, especially in Haifa, Chicago, New York, Oxford, the Sierras and Sydney; the impact on the average believer’s current thinking on Esperanto is devastating. Perhaps the wisest retraction to date of sentences found in several editions of BNE in the 1940s and 1950s is afforded in this example from the aforesaid location re language; once again, not composed by the Bahá’í Esperantist author, Doctor John Ebenezer Esslemont, whose classic work, the Guardian assures us, “would inspire generations yet unborn” and which constitutes “the textbook of the Faith”. (See, The Priceless Pearl pp. 91,102. (*pp46,47) (#pp25,26)): “ ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, in fact, in a Tablet describing the ‘seven candles of unity,’ places unity of language last, as if this ideal cannot be achieved until the world has attained to the unity of nations, the unity of races and the unity of religions.” (*p18) This particular subjoining is doubly troubling vis-a-vis snow-balling long-term damage in that it not only interprets ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, a prerogative of Shoghi Effendi alone, but it appears in print around the world in BNE until shortly before the Guardian’s death, despite his written instructions, 19th November 1945, explaining that the chronology surrounding the ‘seven candles of unity’ “will not necessarily appear in the order given”. [Generally speaking, dear reader, changing entrenched positions in religious administrations is a lifelong job.] Say: Mumma mia or Mamma mia in your neck of the English-speaking woods, mes amis? Mumma meerkat! (*) Making World Peace Real – The Bahá’í Faith and Esperanto is a large and inexpensive work approved by the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of Australia in 2003. Presentations on the history, central Figures and institutions of both movements are provided, together with an account of personal teaching experiences and adventures. A course on Esperanto and a smallish dictionary are also included along with poetry and a glimpse of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s ‘wicked’ sense of humour: https://gumroad.com/l/making_world_peace_real/ (*)