Privacy has a place?

This is an archived post from the old bulletin board. For new posts, see the forum.

Posted by Stuart Gilman ( on December 31, 2002 at 04:11:51:

In Reply to: Re: All Writings Are Mystical - All and Every One posted by Rob on December 29, 2002 at 23:28:57:

Rob writes: "From a scholarly point of view, it would be nice to be able to read everything, but from a moral point of view we have to acknowledge that privacy has a place."

This sentence makes no logical sense. From a scholarly point of view, I want everyone to read my wonderful poems, but from a personal point of view I dont want anyone to know my children hate me. How can this be justified? As a perfect Bahai - which I am not - or as a Manifestation - which I am not - I should not have family who desert me, but I do. Yet, I do not want their reasons to be published, for their reasons would or could tarnish my image. After all, their reasons would not ENHANCE my image. No, this is not something a great person, let alone a perfect disciple or a Blessed Beauty would accept.

"From a moral point of view" ... would demand that everything personal and public about our Great Leaders be known, even the rumours and the falsehoods. Their greatness would superscend falsehoods and calumny.

I did not know that scholarship stopped at the door of privacy. This is entirely opposite to the nature and practice of scholarship, research, biography, academic theses and other discursive modalities.

Especially in a case where I declare myself to be The One. If I am the One - which I am not - what have I to fear from revelations about my own personal habits, hygeine, arguments or the sound of my high-pitched, irritating voice? If God looked like an ogre or a centipede, would He care?

Rob's post once again discourages me. Where are the scholars, the philospohers, the scientists - they are not here.


this topic is closed - post at