Hi, Gilberto, At 08:24 PM 12/25/2004, you wrote: >>Ok, maybe I'm just totally wrong but I have the impression that you are >>saddling them with unnecessary baggage. I mean, I would tend to be rather >>mellow about the term "perennialism" be more inclusive in how I use it.<<
Well, perennialism is only a word. However, it has generally been, especially since it was popularized by Huxley, an appellation for a kind of transreligious Platonism. I am not aware of any contemporary self-defined perennialists who who are not Platonists. >>But is that a necessary connection?<< Connections between words and meanings are never necessary. >>I would just say that it seems like there are many deep and not so deep >>commonalities across world religions. We are all in the same boat.<< I agree about the commonalities, at least as they were originally presented by the Prophets, especially if one can distinguish Revelation from paradigmatic context. >>Belief in perennialism seems more true to me than insisting that perennialism >>is false.<< I think one can recognize the eternal aspects of various divine Revelations without falling back on perennialism or Platonism. In my view, perennialism turns God into an automaton and religion into magick. I wrote: >>>>I would never say there are no fixed rules or eternal laws. However, if >>>>they are fixed or eternal, it is because God desires them to be that way. >>>>They are emanations from God, not manifestations of God.<<<< You replied: >>I'm not sure about the distinction you are making here.<< A manifestation is an appearance. If I hold up a mirror to someone's face, I can say that the mirror manifests that person's face. My individual soul is my reality. I *am* a soul. My body is a manifestation of that soul. The Prophet's divine nature manifests, or reveals, God's Essence. An emanation is an expression. My various websites express, or emanate from, my interests and thoughts. They do not manifest me. An actor's performance expresses, or is an emanation from, her or his thinking processes. The performance is not a manifestation of the actor. Similarly, the teachings of the Prophets emanate from the Will of God. They do not manifest hypothetical Platonic ideal forms in the mind of God. They are relative to God's Will, not reflections, or manifestations, of God's Essence. >>And I could have sworn that you did seem to have a problem with the idea of >>fixed rules. Because I think I remember suggesting the scenario of God >>willing the rules to stay hte same.<< In principle, I don't have a problem with fixed rules or laws. However, I would say that, if there are any constants, it is only because God has willed them. The differentiation between ideal forms and divine Will (not constants per se) is what distinguishes ontological realism from nominalism. >>Eh fair enough. Although I've heard from Susan many moons ago that there are >>some perennialist Bahais. After reading that passage in Some Answered >>Questions its not really surprising.<< Most Baha'is I know, even those who never heard of the word, are perennialists. >>Why not basically true?<< To me, "basically" implies ideal forms. With regards, Mark A. Foster * 15 Sites: http://markfoster.net "Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger" -- Abbie Hoffman __________________________________________________ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
