On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:32:57 -0600, Mark A. Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gilberto, > At 07:47 PM 12/27/2004, you wrote: > >>I'm not sure what you mean. Those seeming exclusive statements in the Bab's > >>writings combined with a kind of perennialism (that all religions are fit > >>to be universal) make sense from a traditionalist perennialism.<< > But where do you get the perennialism? Doesn't the Bab's > reference to each Revelation being perfected in the next one > point to a > kind of progressive Revelation?
Maybe I'm misremembering it but the passage I saw recently talked about the previous revelations being renewed which to me suggested more of a repetitive process where the revelation is more of a reminder of what came before. > >>I wouldn't call myself a card-carrying Traditionalist or Perennialist but I > >>like the authors I've read from that perspective (Nasr, Schuon, Lings, > >>Eaton) and their ideas appeal to me.<< > If I were a perennialist, Lex Hixon's approach (similar to Aldous Huxley's) > or H.P.B.'s Theosophy would probably appeal to me more than than Schuon's or > Guenon's. Traditionalism seems much too conservative to me. I wouldn't call myself conservative by temperment. But by Traditionalism all I'm saying is that although I like Perennialism, I also don't think that anything goes.If you really believe that God spoke at specific times in history then it makes sense to strive to connect to God through those traditional authentic channels. That doesn't necessarily leave non-traditional people out in the cold though. > >>That's just it though. I think that if God is really speaking and a > >>religion is worth its salt, it doesn't need to be replaced by another in > >>order to progress.<< > > However, the major theme of Bab's writings was, in effect, His replacement, > and revelational progress has never been a theme of most (any?) major > perennialist writers. > > >>If the revelation is really inspired, then morally sensitive people from > >>the particular religious tradiition can still go back to the revelation and > >>apply the truth in ways which are appropriate for our times.<< > > Do you think that the Bab left His revelation to "morally sensitive people" > to apply to their times? I think we are talking about two different things. One is whether the Bab was a Perennialist. I'm willing to hold off on that till reading more about the writings. Secondly, whether Perennialism/Traditionalism makes sense independently of whether the Bab endorsed it or not. Gilberto: > >>I would think about it differently. Allowing for the moment the possibility > >>that Bahaullah really is a Manifestation, then perhaps the claim of the > >>Bahai faith to be the most recent progressed faith is a relative one which > >>depends on your perspective, just as the Jewish claim that the Torah is > >>valid forever (at least it says so in the Bible) is a relative one.<< Mark: > However, in the case of the Baha'i Faith, it is Baha'u'llah > Who regarded His Revelation to be the most recent. But I thought in the Bahai > faith religious language was generally seen as metaphorical and relative. > Even if Bahaullah said "This is the bestest religion ever" it still doesn't > rule out that the claim is relative. > > >>Sure, and it would also include taking a traditional understanding of "seal > >>of the prophets" seriously as well.<< > > How would you interpret "seal" (khatam) from a traditionalist standpoint? I'm not sure how Schuon and Nasr do it. Personally, I would just refuse to call post-Muhammad religious figures prophets.I mean, I haven't concluded that Bahaullah is a Manifestation so your question isn't all that deep to me. I guess in general I would take the standard claims of Islam seriously. But then hold out the possibility that my opinion or perspective is only relatively true. And that from a God's-eye perspective it might be possible to reconcile the various claims of different religions. People who believe in other religions might fall under "ahl al-kitab".The Quran also mentions "those who believe in Allah and the Last Day" which would necessarily be more inclusive. There are passages in the Quran and hadith which suggest that tawhid might be sufiicient for salvation so I would be open to the idea that other religions might satisfy God's criteria for tawhid whether I can recognize it or not. Mark: For instance, what if some followers of, say, Meher Baba, claimed to be traditionalists and regarded Baba as the latest prophet, avatar, etc.? Would you accept their claim from their own traditionalist standpoint but reject it from your own? Gilberto: I wouldn't "accept" their claim from their perspective. I would avoid "avatar" or any kind of incarnational language. But hold out the possibility that they are saintly monotheists and that God will accept them. Mark: What about if some Baha'is were traditionalists, and there are some, and made similar claims about Baha'u'llah? I'm not sure what a Bahai traditionalist would look like? Peace Gilberto "My people are hydroponic" __________________________________________________ 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
