Bahaipedia:Bahá’í point of view

Bahaipedia seeks to present information from a Bahá’í point of view, i.e., in a manner that is not only consistent with Bahá’í beliefs and principles, but also maintains a moderate tone and straightforward presentation of facts. We should be as open and direct as possible, while avoiding excessive, dogmatic, or potentially misleading language. As an example, this means that on Bahaipedia you would read Bahá’u’lláh is... instead of Bahá’ís believe Bahá’u’lláh is....

A straightforward and non-editorialized writing style is one important component to our presentation; the other is Bahaipedia:Verifiability. Together, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in the project. These principles cannot be superseded by other policies or guidelines, or by editors' consensus. Their policy pages may be edited only to improve the application and explanation of the principles.

What is a Bahá’í point of view?

Writing from a "Bahá’í point of view" means that the writer's contributions are in essential harmony with Bahá’í teachings on the topic at hand; that they convey the spirit of those teachings as purely and as clearly as possible. Of course, we cannot necessarily expect to represent perfectly the Bahá’í viewpoint on any given question; despite our best efforts, some of our own personal understanding and interpretation may creep in. Rather, the intent of this policy is to keep contributions focused on presenting Bahá’í beliefs in an authentic manner.

Straightforward statements about Bahá’í belief that are directly supported by Bahá’í Writings constitute part of a Bahá’í point of view. For instance, “Bahá’u’lláh is a Manifestation of God” is an uncontroversial statement that represents a Bahá’í point of view.

Harmony with Bahá’u’lláh's Writings

As Bahá’í beliefs arise directly from the Creative Word of God as revealed by Bahá’u’lláh, statements in harmony with Bahá’u’lláh's Writings constitute a part of Bahá’í point of view. For example, the following statement represents a Bahá’í point of view, because it is a paraphrase from the words of Bahá’u’lláh as recorded in the Epistle to the Son of the Wolf:

The essence of religion in this day is that the various religions of the world should not be allowed to foster feelings of animosity, disunity, or hatred among men.

Harmony with Bahá’u’lláh's Covenant

In the Kitáb-i-‘Ahd, Bahá’u’lláh explicitly established a Covenant with His followers, stating that after His passing, His followers should turn to ‘Abdu’l-Bahá to clarify any uncertainties and answer any questions they might have. In turn, in His Will and Testament, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá explicitly asked the Bahá’ís to turn to the Guardian—Shoghi Effendi—and the Universal House of Justice. In the light of the clear line of succession thus defined and the interpretive and/or legislative infallibility conferred upon each of them, statements in harmony with the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Shoghi Effendi, and the Universal House of Justice constitute a part of Bahá’í point of view. For example, the following statement represents a Bahá’í point of view, because it is a paraphrase from the words of Shoghi Effendi as recorded in The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh:

In order to achieve full maturity, human society must abandon the idea that individual nations hold absolute sovereignty, recognize the oneness and interconnectedness of mankind, and incorporate these principles of oneness and interconnectedness into a new framework that can address the common problems of a single, united humanity.

Weight given to authoritative sources

Bahaipedia differs from other encyclopedias in that it tends to give greater weight to Bahá’í sources. Thus, when statements supported by different sources contradict one another, official and authoritative sources are given priority in writing articles. In some cases, other views may be noted as such, cited, and incorporated into an article; however, in other cases—such as in matters of Bahá’í belief that are well discussed in authoritative Writings—limiting oneself to authoritative sources would be the most consistent with offering a Bahá’í point of view. In cases where several sources are incorporated into an article, it is important that editors situate the research; that is, provide contextual information about the point of view, indicating how prevalent the position is, and whether it is held by a majority or minority.

As an example, the article on the Soviet Union discusses the history of the Bahá’í community in that land after the Bolshevik revolution. As there is little in the way of historical record of these events in the Writings and correspondence of the Central Figures of the Faith, the Guardian, or Bahá’í institutions, views reported by various individual Bahá’ís are considered. On the other hand, the article on the Holy Spirit benefits from a wealth of references to the talks and correspondence of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Who addressed the topic extensively during His journeys to the West. In this case, secondary sources may be included to broaden the article's perspective and include Bahá’í scholarship, but the greatest weight goes on the Writings themselves.

One exception to the above may be for items outside the domain of infallibility of Bahá’í figures. As an example, as noted in correspondence on His behalf, Shoghi Effendi related that "[t]he infallibility of the Guardian is confined to matters which are related strictly to the Cause and interpretation of the teachings; he is not an infallible authority on other subjects, such as economics, science, etc." While due weight should be given to authoritative Writings in these cases, it is possible that errors may be found. At the same time, contributors must take care not to cross the line into original research by advancing synthetic claims or speculation (see What is not a Bahá’í point of view? below).

What is not a Bahá’í point of view?

• Statements that contain excessively neutral language or which express doubt or skepticism about Bahá’í teachings are inappropriate when adopting a Bahá’í point of view. Phrases such as “Bahá’ís believe” or “Bahá’ís claim”, while they may be appropriate for other encyclopedias, are unnecessary on Bahaipedia. For example, the statement “Bahá’ís claim that Bahá’u’lláh is a Manifestation of God” is needlessly long and could even be construed as casting doubt on Bahá’u’lláh's station. A better and shorter alternative would be “Bahá’u’lláh is a Manifestation of God”.

• Statements that call into question or contradict statements made in the Bahá’í Writings cannot be considered as part of a Bahá’í point of view. For example, the statement “It is possible for there to be a second Guardian after Shoghi Effendi” contradicts the stipulations of the Will and Testament of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá and the ruling of the Universal House of Justice on the office of the Guardianship; it would therefore be inappropriate for inclusion on Bahaipedia.

• Statements of personal opinion or individual interpretation and synthetic or speculative claims cannot be considered as part of a Bahá’í point of view; these fall under the category of original research. For example, the statement “The Universal House of Justice will eventually make legislation regarding gay marriage” amounts to speculation, and is inappropriate for inclusion on Bahaipedia.

• References to published statements that make such claims would not constitute original research, but they may still have BPOV issues if they call into question or contradict statements made in the Bahá’í Writings, or if they are given undue weight in an article (see above).

• Statements that include puffery are inappropriate. For example, the statement “The Bahá’ís of Townsville have consistently been involved in community service since 1983, and have participated in the annual parade since 2001” is acceptable because it is simple and factual, whereas the statement “The Bahá’ís of Townsville are exemplary in their efforts at community service, and they always have the nicest floats in the annual parade” is excessive.

• Statements that aim to defame, harrass, or threaten individuals, institutions, or groups, whether Bahá’í or not, are completely inappropriate. For example, hateful statements regarding Bahá’ís would be just as unacceptable as hateful statements towards Muslims, Christians, or Covenant-breakers, whether aimed at individuals or as a group. In the case where Covenant-breakers or opponents of the Bahá’í Faith are being discussed, it is appropriate to quote from and cite official Bahá’í sources, as long as they are verifiable; however, it would be completely inappropriate to state, for example, “Mr. So-and-so is a Covenant-breaker” without citing an official communication confirming this.

Dos and don'ts of BPOV

Do...

• ...capitalize He, Him, etc. when referencing God, Manifestations of God, or ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. Pronouns or nouns in the platonic form referring to God, Manifestations of God, or ‘Abdu’l-Bahá should also be capitalized.
• ...be straightforward; e.g.: Bahá’u’lláh is a Manifestation of God, and not "Bahá’ís believe that..." or "Bahá’ís claim that..."
• ...treat the statements of Central Figures as truth, thus presenting the Bahá’í view.
• ...prefer official and authoritative sources as much as possible, and make sure to cite and link to them to allow readers to learn more (see Bahaipedia:Gateway not a destination).
• ...give due weight to various sources, with deference to official and authoritative ones. In cases where authoritative statements on a subject do not exist or are inconclusive, make sure to situate claims in a broad context, and to differentiate between views held by a majority or a minority.
• ...stay humble, simple and factual in narrating events or achievements.

Don't...

• ...cast doubt on Bahá’í teachings, or consider them as up for debate.
• ...confuse authentic teachings with personal interpretations. The easiest way to clear this up is to refer directly to official and authoritative sources as much as possible, and refrain from drawing conclusions based on them.
• ...offer speculation or synthetic claims based on your understanding of one or more sources. Information on Bahaipedia must be verifiable; make sure that what you want to say is supported by a reliable, and ideally authoritative, source before adding it here.
• ...put undue weight on secondary sources over official, authoritative statements. Referring to scholarship is vital to writing Bahaipedia articles, but non-authoritative sources must be properly situated and given due weight.
• ...overstate Bahá’í achievements or indulge in triumphalism.
• ...use defamatory language when writing about individuals, institutions or groups. In particular, defamation of living people is completely prohibited on Bahaipedia, and such material is to be removed immediately. When in doubt, leave it out.