Hi, Gilberto, At 09:53 PM 12/27/2004, you wrote: >>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.<<
That passage referred to a Revelation being perfected, not renewed, through the subsequent Revelation. >>That doesn't necessarily leave non-traditional people out in the cold >>though.<< Okay. That is different from what most self-defined traditionalist authors believe. >>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.<< Yes. >>Secondly, whether Perennialism/Traditionalism makes sense independently of >>whether the Bab endorsed it or not.<< Paradigms are constructed sets of assumptions. If one accepts a particular paradigm, the conclusions one draws will follow from, and be consistent with, it. Thus, the paradigm becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. In other words, most any system of beliefs can make relative sense. >>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.<< That has been a difficult issue for some Muslims who accept traditionalism. In other words, one is faced with the impossibility of accepting any faith systems subsequent to Islam as legitimate "traditions" founded by a Prophet (Meher Baba, Baha'u'llah, Ramakrishna, etc.). It may also account for why traditionalism has never been a majority opinion among perennialists, who tend to be more universal and syncretist. >>I guess in general I would take the standard claims of Islam seriously.<< I have always found Islam attractive - even when I was a child. The main concept which prevented me from accepting it was the near universal understanding of "the seal" among Muslims. For that reason, I gravitated more towards Eckankar (surat shabd yoga), Thelema, Theosophy, Vedanta, and (briefly) Sikhism. >>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.<< To my understanding, Baha'i soteriology comes closest to inclusivism, the view that God can choose to "save" whoever He wishes, rather than a pure universalism. IMO, universalism, like exclusivism, compromises God's absolute sovereignty. >>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.<< Okay. >>I'm not sure what a Bahai traditionalist would look like?<< There are at least a few traditionalists in Baha'i cyberspace (not sure about this list). The ones I have known emphasize the "eternal teachings" of different faith systems; they see "progressive Revelation" in relation to the exoteric (social), not the esoteric (eternal), elements of religions; and they tend to be Platonists. 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
