These books have frequently been borrowed and burned by Baha'is

For a seemingly liberal faith, Baha'ism has a disappointing record with regard to censorship issues. Babism, out of which the movement emerged, made the burning of books not strictly treating of the faith a religious obligation. Baha' Allah, in reversing many Babi ordinances (like holy war) indicated that book-burning was to be considered a grave sin. Nonetheless, Baha'is have indulged in the burning of disapproved texts on more than one occasion. A Persian text edited by Professor E. G. Browne, the Nuqtat al-kaf, was considered (falsely) by Baha'is to have been influenced by a heretical group; it was widely shunned, and in Iran large numbers were burned.

Many European and western libraries have stocked publications by excommunicated Baha'i organizations. These have frequently been borrowed and burned by Baha'is, to whom such works are the purest poison. Baha'is are generally forbidden to own or read the works of excommunicates (Covenant-Breakers), although in recent years it has been argued that Baha'i scholars may do so for the purposes of research, provided permission is obtained from the supreme religious authority.

Less dramatically, in 1983 a national Baha'i body threatened that if Penguin Books were to publish a book in which the movement was described by a writer of whom they disapproved, they would forbid their members to buy copies. Publication went ahead.

Within the movement, all publications are vetted. The task of pre-censorship is generally carried out by national 'reviewing' committees, whose task is to read all manuscripts written by Baha'is, whether for an official Baha'i press or for a non-Baha'i publication or journal. They can recommend changes or an outright ban. This applies not only to books and pamphlets strictly on Baha'i topics, but to academic works, poetry, and even music. Technically, a Baha'i refusing to make recommended changes or even to submit his or her work for 'review' faces severe administrative penalties (including the removal of the right to vote or be elected to Baha'i councils) which could, in principle, lead to excommunication. Inevitably, a great deal of self-censorship is practised at all levels.

This self-censorship extends to the bowdlerization of Baha'i publications. The best-known examples are the rewriting of an important Baha'i history, Nabil's Narrative, and the non-publication of the original Persian text; the removal of an important historical document from the second edition of a collection of Persian-language histories; a new edition of an important biography, minus several chapters; and instructions for the suppression of certain passages from a memoir published some years ago in California.

Failure to exercise self-censorship has led to trouble on more than one occasion. At least one Baha'i journal has been forced to stop publication for having ventured too far into controversial areas; a study group in Los Angeles was shut down for the same offence; a publisher was threatened with closure after accusations that some of its books contained unacceptable material; and, more recently, attempts have been made to control debate on a number of on-line discussion forums.

Within the Islamic world, the outright banning of Baha'i literature is only one of numerous instances of deep-seated intolerance for nonconformist thought. Nevertheless, it remains the most long-standing and widespread case, and one to which little attention has been paid by human rights organizations. Perversely, Baha'i routines of internal censorship pose serious problems in that the movement is keenly involved with aspects of UN work and is internationally active in the promotion of the rights to freedom of belief and expression.

DENIS MACEOIN

https://books.google.com/books?id=gDqsCQAAQBAJ&pg=PA168&