Religion is a Choice and Baha'i is Good
In this day and age, and from now on, religion is a choice. Maybe it wasn't this way when the Islamic armies swept across the middle of Eurasia. Maybe it wasn't this way in Medieval Europe when there was an Inquisition. But now, most people can choose to join any religion they want to, or no religion at all, with the exception of people in some Islamic countries. Baha'u'llah's rejection of the sword for promoting specific religious ideas goes along well with the new realities in the world; and I think the sword Baha'u''llah talks about includes unduly hard core verbal techniques of persuasion as well as actually physically violent ones. To be honest with ourselves, there are no objective criteria to make a fail-safe choice of religion. There are many good religions available to choose from. And agnosticism is a fine choice also; after all, more harm has been done by religious institutions, groups and zealots than by any other category of people the world has ever known. Personally, I like the perennial philosophy, but there is no logically sound reason why everyone else needs to affirm it. However, I also would like to be part of a religious tradition that is historically based. This brings one logically to the Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity, Islam and the Baha'i Faith. I find the Iqan to be the most persuasive of Baha'i texts. As Brent so cogently summarized, the Iqan offers many ways to recognize a Manifestation and I am taking the liberty to repeat it in full: Brent Poirier writes: As to the ways Baha'u'llah aids us in the Iqan to recognize the Manifestation, and whether logic is involved. In my personal view, one needs to approach the Iqan without preconceptions as to what Baha'u'llah will offer as proofs. Instead, to see what He actually presents as proofs and arguments. There are many such ways He presents of recognizing the Manifestation, or tools to recognize Him: p. 6 Observe the character of the denials of those who oppose the Manifestation, this will increase our faith p. 13 the prophecies of the former Manifestations foretelling one another p. 14 Sanctifying our eyes, ears and hearts from whatever they have seen, heard and felt p. 17 reading the authorized interpreters views of the Word of God p 28 Listening with a humble mind to the Prophets' explanations of the Holy Books p 42 understanding the symbolic meanings of the terms darkening of the sun and the moon, to see that the prophecies of the New Manifestation have been fulfilled p. 49 observing that the Manifestation removes the veils of mystery from the words of God p 52 pondering the Word of God p 53 meditating on the lives of the Prophets p 58 evaluating the claims of the Prophets with fair-mindedness and justice p 66 signs in the visible sky 72 overcoming the clouds which block the vision, including the appearance of the Manifestations with human limitations 73 overcoming the objection that the Manifestations change the divine laws in every age 75 Recognizing the Manifestation by His own self 79 Realizing that those who have cleansed themselves of all human traits and limitations and adorned themselves with the divine qualities are a means by which truth is recognized and established 82-83 realizing that leaders of religion are not good guides to recognition of the new Manifestation due to their literal interpretation of the divine verses according to their own limited understanding p 110 the spiritual sovereignty each Manifestation demonstrates is a sign of His Prophethood 112 observing the binding force that unites the followers of the Manifestation, and the dividing power that separates His opponents 120 possessing a pure heart 134 realizing that the Manifestation has the power to forgive sins 146 seeing that the learned have fallen and the ignorant have been raised up 147-148 reading the Qur'an to see what prevented the people from recognizing the Prophet Muhammad, and comparing those things to this Day, and what prevents the people from recognizing the Bab 156-7 observing the transforming impact of the Revelation on people's lives 160 observing that just as the companions of the Prophet Muhammad were willing to lay down their lives at His feet, the followers of the Bab were willing to do the same 162-171 not being prevented from recognizing the Manifestation by such terms as first, last, and seal. 164-5 seeing with one's own eyes instead of through the eyes of the clergy 174 ponder the verses of the Holy Books with no desire other than to please God 177-182 recognizing the Manifestation, whatever titles He claims, whether Prophet, Messenger, Servant, Guardian, or Divinity. 187-190 being cleansed from the obscure knowledge that pretenders to knowledge claim 191-199 studying the Word of God with the qualities of a true seeker and not with human learning Back to Ron's musings: This is a great list and I have studied it. There is no doubt
Re: What Convinced Me (was: Questions about Omniscience and related matters)
Yes, hello , Elaine, I am very familiar with your account of your conversion, from your web site. It is the most moving Baha'i conversion account I have ever read. By all means, I recommend that anyone who has not read your account, do so at your web site http://elainna.org/Spirit/Journey.html It rings of authenticity and is probably the most miraculous account of an experience that I have ever been able to believe in, in Baha'i literature. In addition, I have greatly enjoyed other written works on your web site. Peace and love, Ron Stephens On Dec 30, 2004, at 9:04 PM, Elaine Crowell wrote: Dear Ron, I was 35 when I embraced the Faith. I was a seeker after transcendence since I was 12 or maybe 15. I tell the story of my conversion on my web-site.http://elainna.org/Spirit/Journey.html Unlike most of the Baha'is I know, I came to the faith through a series of visionary experiences. My first Baha'i book was The Seven Valleys and The Four Valleys, my second, Proclamation to the Nations by Shoghi Effendi, and my third was Gleanings. Each of these books made a deep impression on me However it was the second which set up an internal conflict that finally brought me to the point of declaring. I was nearly torn apart by a combination of these books and my visions. Perhaps one of the things which helped me was my awareness of how ignorant I really was and a set of guide lines I created to guide my search for a true religion. The following is taken from my narrative. WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A TRUE RELIGION? By true, I meant something, which was understandable and would facilitate spiritual development on a personal and social level. I came up with the following: A true religion would be universal. It would offer something for everyone irrespective of his or her age, education, and cultural or social background. It would not be for the elite, neither would it succumb to populist views or special interest groups. A True religion would focus on spiritual education rather than on sin and the need for redemption. It would not set itself up as the arbiter between the value and worth of certain souls and the wickedness of others. A true religion would be as concerned with the welfare of the whole human race as it was with individuals. It would be part of the world, not some isolated, insulated, naval gazing cult. Finally, and possibly most important, A True religion would not necessarily agree with my preferences and expectations. It would not conform to my limited and biased point of view. I added this last stipulation because I knew I had outgrown nearly every belief I had previously held. Therefore, if I found something that was in complete accord with my beliefs and feelings, I would eventually cease to grow. You asked about doubts. Yes I have them but my chief doubts are about myself, my understanding and the Baha'i Community. Not being an intellectual or an academic, I prefer to focus on action rather than theory. For example the Tragedy in South-East Asia has claimed at least 100,000 souls and the people there desperately need help. I am praying along with another group of women on line. I wonder why no one has mentioned this tragedy on this list and if there are Baha'i Communities there? I would like it if the Faith was perfectly logical rational and if my fellow Baha'is were more supportive and could instantly translate the Writings into action. However, it is very difficult for me to be critical of others when I know how far short of the standard I fall. Warm Wishes, Elainna The Doors are open at Elainna's New Place http://elainna.org The Wild Side http://elainnas-wild-side.net __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 __ 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
Re: Questions about Omniscience and related matters
On Dec 28, 2004, at 11:14 PM, Sandra Chamberlain wrote: Dear Ron, you wrote: Since every Manifestation acted consistently with natural law, and acted as if They were not omniscient and omnipotent, to believe that they were Omniscient and Omnipotent means believing that They lived their lives acting in a false way, in some cruel and sordid Joke pretending to be human in the real world when in reality They were Magicians above it all. To my way of thinking to deny the Power of God to express His Will through a human Mouthpiece, as were all His Manifestations, is to deny all Creation. How so? Omniscient at will.. Whose will? Baha'u'llah prayed: Aid me, O my Lord, to surrender myself wholly to Thy Will. Good point. But I still wonder why God would do it this way. And it still violates Occam's Razor. Wouldn't it be a lot simpler to assume that Abdul Baha used an interpreter becuase he could't understand English well without one? __ 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
Re: Questions about Omniscience and related matters
On Dec 28, 2004, at 11:21 PM, Brent Poirier wrote: As to the omniscience of the Manifestation, it is referred to in more than one place. For example, on the subject of Baha'u'llah's appointment of Abdu'l-Baha as successor and interpreter of the Word, Abdu'l-Baha writes of the omniscience of the Manifestation: My reply: I have no problem with that, of course. i believe in everything that is in the Writings. But the omniscience referred to is relative, not absolute, to my way of thinking; just like Baha'u'llah could refer to Himself as God , but we know (because He told us) that he is not at all the same as the essence of God. To take His statement that He can call Himself God simply and literally woudl be a great error; I think to take the Master's statement about His omniscience simply and literally would be a equally great error. The point at issue is clear, direct and of utmost brevity. Either Bahá'u'lláh was wise, omniscient and aware of what would ensue, or was ignorant and in error. (Selections from the Writings of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 213) As to the power of a person lacking omniscience to interpret the universal mind of the Manifestation, that is an interestingly-posed question, and an apparent paradox. But resolution of paradoxes is a part of our spiritual life. The Master asserts His own ability to accurately state the implications of the Words of Baha'u'llah, as does Shoghi Effendi: Addressing all the people of the world He saith: When the Mystic Dove flieth away from the orchard of praise to the Most Supreme and Invisible Station -- that is, when the Blessed Beauty turneth away from the contingent world towards the invisible realm -- refer whatever ye do not understand in the Book to Him Who hath branched from the Ancient Root. That is, whatever He saith is the very truth. (Selections from the Writings of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 214) The fact that the Guardian has been specifically endowed with such power as he may need to reveal the purport and disclose the implications of the utterances of Bahá'u'lláh and of 'Abdu'l-Bahá does not necessarily confer upon him a station co-equal with those Whose words he is called upon to interpret. He can exercise that right and discharge this obligation and yet remain infinitely inferior to both of them in rank and different in nature. (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 151) My reply: I am in complerte harmony with all of the above quotes. As to the scriptural evidences that the Manifestations are not omniscient, I believe that these fall within the Master's explanation in Some Answered Questions, in a chapter on the Explanation of the rebukes addressed by God to the Prophets. The Master explains that when God criticizes the Prophets, the address is only outwardly to the Manifestation, but in reality to educate the people. The Master gives the example (SAQ p. 169) of Moses striking the rock in the wilderness, when God told Him to speak to it. This is often viewed as proof that Moses sinned, but as the Master explained, it was the Israelites, not Moses, who erred. As to the Maid of Heaven, my understanding is that this is not a reference to when Baha'u'llah became aware of His Mission. It is when His Mission began. In Some Answered Questions, in a chapter entitled Outward Forms and Symbols must be used to Convey Intellectual Conceptions, the Master explains that the state and condition of the Manifestation is not comprehensible by man and in order for man to comprehend, symbols are used. The Master then explains Baha'u'llah's statement in a Tablet to the Shah, that He was asleep and then He awoke. Briefly, the Holy Manifestations have ever been, and ever will be, Luminous Realities; no change or variation takes place in Their essence. Before declaring Their manifestation, They are silent and quiet like a sleeper, and after Their manifestation, They speak and are illuminated, like one who is awake. (Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 85) So this is an example of a statement in the Writings -- the statement that the Manifestation was asleep on His couch and the breezes of God awoke Him -- that should be understood symbolically. My reply: Yes, the Manifestation's essence is the same for all eternity, backwards and forwards. But, They are asleep until They are apprised of their Mission at a specific point in their adult lives. So They did not consciously know about it until then, isn't that what these passages are saying? __ 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 -
Re: Questions about Omniscience and related matters
On Dec 29, 2004, at 12:29 AM, Susan Maneck wrote: My reply: I assume Abraham actually existed. Of course there is no objective proof for this, but I take the Manifestations' Word for this You mean, Their omniscience? I take Their statements literally unless thye violate natural law. The existence of a human who inspired the stories about Abraham does not require violation of physical laws of the universe, it is , in other words, credible, even when understood literally. So I do take it literally. Why strain at a gnat and swallow a camel? This drives me crazy when you do it, often, Dr. Maneck. You accept wildly improbable notions like Omniscience at Will Apparently we have different ideas as to which are the gnats and which are the camels. I accept that the Manifestation is 'omniscient at will' because the Guardian indicated this was so. As usual, there is the question of waht does omniscient at will mean? I apply to the this statement of the Guardian's secretary the standard raised by Baha'u'llah when assessing the Books of previous Manifestations: is it credible literally, or does it require spiritual interpretation to make it credible? Doe sit conform with logic , common sense and human reason when taken literally? If not, could it not be spiritual adn symbolic in meaning? is the Guardian's secretary now a higher authority than the text of teh Quran to which Baha'u'llah applied this standard in teh IqaN? You begin to see how our literal understanding of Infallibility begins to cause absurdities, (as secretary with more Authority than than Muhammad and Baha'u'llah combined). Since every Manifestation acted consistently with natural law, Is this in the Writings somewhere, or just a presumption on your part? My reply: Wow. This baffles me the most. I don't need to quote scripture. Just look at Their lives, all of Them. They lived, they died they breathed etc etc etc. They walked, they didn't teleport themselves. Thye didn't go around violating natural laws. Name on natural law Baha'u'llah violated. There are miracles associated with Baha'u'llah. You chose not to accept them. Whether or not these constituted violations of natural law I'm not prepared to say. But I wouldn't make categorical statements about it either way. What are these miracles associated: with Baha'u'llah? How are they associated? Did Baha'u'llah record them Himself? Keep in mind, I *do* most assuredly believe in miracles. But the miracles I believe in are spiritual, not violations of natural physical law. God is a law maker, not a law breaker. My replY: Yes, a Natural one and a very mystical, symbolic one. No, a divine nature* not a mystical, symbolic one. It is just as real as their human nature. I agree, Their Divine Nature is completely real, but spiritual, not physical. Their physical natures were human. You do in spiritual realities, do you not? __ 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
Re: Questions about Omniscience and related matters
Brent, you commented earlier , I think, that the main theme you saw in teh Book of Certitude was sort of how do we recognize a Manifestation I agree that is a main theme. I think the answer is (partly) by seeing if what He says is logical, reasonable and also affirms the spiritual message of previous Manifestations. What do you and others think teh answer given in teh Iqan is to the question how should we go about recognizing a Manifestation?' Doesn't reason adn logic figure into this? How else are we to recognize a Manifestation and distinguish Them from other holy and good figures who are not manifestations? __ 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
Re: Questions about Omniscience and related matters
Yes, it seems to me there is usually more than one perspective available form the Writings on a given topic. I like that. for instance, the famous passage where Bah'u'llah sees tablet in His mind, i do nopt thhink He actually 'sees a Tablet but He chose that phrase and image to try to communicate His reality to us. On Dec 29, 2004, at 9:33 PM, Firouz Anaraki wrote: I think what Baha'u'llah means in the Lawh-i Hikmat, it clearly is not that he just had to close his eyes and He could see or read what He wanted to know. Baha'u'llah states in the Kitab-i-Iqan: ... a certain man, [Haji Mirza Karim Khan] reputed for his learning and attainments, ... hath in his book denounced and vilified all the exponents of true learning. As We had frequently heard about him, We purposed to read some of his works. Although We never felt disposed to peruse other peoples' writings, yet as some had questioned Us concerning him, We felt it necessary to refer to his books, in order that We might answer Our questioners with knowledge and understanding. His works, in the Arabic tongue, were, however, not available, until one day a certain man informed Us that one of his compositions, entitled Irshadu'l-'Avam, (Guidance unto the ignorant.) could be found in this city. ... We sent for the book, and kept it with Us a few days. It was probably referred to twice. The second time, We accidentally came upon the story of the Mi'raj of Muhammad, Kitab-i Iqan, 184-6 Baha'u'llah had to wait until he had read the book before he felt able to speak of it with knowledge and understanding. He had a collection of books, and kept some of them. In studying the Writings, we should not take a single verse on its own, but rather take a wide selection of the writings. Baha'u'llah acknowledges having normal human limitations. regards, Firouz __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 __ 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
Re: Questions about Omniscience and related matters
On Dec 29, 2004, at 11:42 PM, Susan Maneck wrote: Yes, it seems to me there is usually more than one perspective available form the Writings on a given topic. I like that. for instance, the famous passage where Baha'u'llah sees tablet in His mind, i do not think He actually 'sees a Tablet but He chose that phrase and image to try to communicate His reality to us. Which is what, Ron? Susan, I have no idea. My point is, I think Baha'u'llah chose to express His reality, of how He received inspiration not available o teh rest of us, using the best symbolic image he could think of. Which was teh tablet that I have heard you and others refer to so often on this list. So, of course I think the tablet is an accurate description, in fact it is no doubt better than nay other imagery possible, or else Baha'u'llah would not have chosen it,. But i dot thin for one moment that what I see in my mind, called up by teh tablet imagery, is anything like the True Reality of what Baha'u'llah actually experienced. Do you see what I mean? I'm no trying to be cute or obscure here at all. Do you think I'm off -bas eon this, too? Thanks for being patient with me. I know that, as you say, I amy not be well liked or generating much sympathy by my posting style. I Guess I'm not exactly trying to elicit sympathy, but rather I do value the honest feedback i am getting on this list, which I can get no where else on these kinds of issues. Love and peace always, ron __ 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
Re: Questions about Omniscience and related matters
Thank you very much for informing me about what languages the Central Figures understood and knew, in the real world. it is very helpful to me, because I did not know. On Dec 28, 2004, at 2:32 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll attempt to answer some of these (leaving opinion out of my reply til Susan makes comment) 1. The Bab and Baha`u'llah spoke Persian on a day-to-day basis. Neither one was particularly trained in Arabic though both showed a remarkable facility for their use of Arabic. Training young men in Arabic in those days (in Persian speaking countries - Farsi was widely spoken as a lignua franca in several dialects), was rather cursory - kind of like training young Jews to read enough Hebrew for their Bar Mitzvah's. One was supposed to be able to read the Qur'an, but training was perfunctory, especially for Baha`u'llah who was brought up as a noble where reading and writing were secondary to the ability to ride a horse and use a sword. The Bab was a merchant and had equally perfunctory training in Arabic. The Bab created a very impressive linguistic style in Arabic, many found it hard to read, but many others found it fluent and beautiful. Baha`u'llah was favorably compared to many Arabic and Persian poets. 2) Abdu'l Baha spoke Arabic, Persian and Turkic with fluency. His world travels must have taught him some smatterings of English and French, but he always used interpreters in his discourse with westerners. Shoghi Effendi was trained in Arabic and Persian, Turkic, English and French, attending western schools in the Holy Land and eventually attending the best universities in England. As to his command of English, I have seen a course sylabus for teaching English literature written by non-Native speakers and Shoghi Effendi is used as a prime fine example of non-fiction and philosophy written in English by a non-native speaker and uses Joseph Conrad (a Pole) as its best example in the writing of fiction. Some find Shoghi Effendi's writings in English to be very complex, but it is hard to fault his use of the language by style and grammar usage of his time. 3) The Maiden is a symbol of Revelation for Baha`u'llah. The Bab saw the severed head of Husayn speak. Muhammed was visited by Gabriel. A dove appeared to symbolized divine Revelation for Jesus. Moses heard the burning bush speak. Are these actual physical apparitions? I doubt it. They are apparitions of the Will of God making itself physically manifest to the Manifestations. 4) I think prophecies are to be viewed on several levels simultaneously. To think of prophecies only on the concrete level is to limit one's understanding. Literalists of whatever sort are only trying to understand a small part of the Message of the Messengers. This is true whether studying the prophecies of Christ or the prophecies of Baha`u'llah. 5) The Manifestations are privy to the Will of God and His Omniscience, each and every One of them equally. However, part of Their obedience to the Will of God is that They revealed only what God bid Them reveal. Jesus was speaking the literal truth when He said: I have many things to tell you, but you cannot bear them now. Regards, Scott __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 __ 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
Re: Questions about Omniscience and related matters
Dr. Susan Maneck wrote, and I respond below: Dear Ron, Before we start, let's keep a couple of things clear. As I understand it the term 'omniscient at will' applies *only* the Manifestation. That phrase occurs only in a letter written on the Guardian's behalf wherein he insists that *unlike* the Manifestation he is not omniscient at will. I don't know of any place in the Writings where the term Omnipotent at will occurs but inasmuch as the Manifestation reflects all the Names and Attributes of God one could infer this. But it would be just that, an inference. I don't think I've ever talked about this myself. Furthermore, I have always argued that it appears to be the case that much of the time the Manifestation does *not* will omniscience. My reply: But Baha'is almost all the time assume that the Central Figures were omniscient at will. Also, how can an Interpreter interpret something said by Baha'u'llah, if Baha'u'llah was Omniscient and the Interpreter isn't? Isn't that backwards? What happens is, we then sometimes can and do safely disregard what Baha'u'llah actually said. For instance, if Abdul Baha said something that can be construed to deny the validity of evolution, then Baha'u'llah's statement that true religion must agree with science, is made null and void. We also completely ignore and disregard Baha'u'llah's explicit distinction between the Most Great Infallibility and other infallibility. (It must mean something! else why put it in our Most Holy Book?) Baha'u'llah's plain and explicit declaration that no one (that includes all other Central Figures and the Universal House of Justice, does it not) shares with Him in the Most Great Infallibility. Others have answered your questions regarding the languages of certain figures. Just one minor correction. I didn't indicate that the Guardian's French was better than his English (although that is what he won prizes for at the Syrian Protestant College) only that this was the language in which he received his early education. And he always counted in that language. He went to Oxford, by the way, not Cambridge and he was already fluent in both English and French before he went there. My reply: Yes, thanks to Scott for answering those questions. The Quran and Bible describe the lives, to same extent anyway, of several Manifestations. The descriptions therein, to my mind, are inconsistent with an understanding of Them as Omniscient at Will and Omnipotent at Will. For instance, Muhammad was very careful to make sure that He was seen as a human being, not God. He is even said to have been illiterate. Baha'u'llah sometimes referred to Himself as illiterate as well. ;-} And yes, all Manifestations have attested to their humanity. As for Abraham, I think historically speaking it is difficult to say anything at all about Abraham. We can't even say for sure that He existed. Stories are told about Him in both the Bible and the Qur'an to make specific points, but I wouldn't use them to speculate regarding His existential state. My reply: I assume Abraham actually existed. Of course there is no objective proof for this, but I take the Manifestations' Word for this and the Holy Scriptures and Writings word for it. Why strain at a gnat and swallow a camel? This drives me crazy when you do it, often, Dr. Maneck. You accept wildly improbable notions like Omniscience at Will (even if only for the Manifestation) and the violation of physical laws (!!!), but you question the existence of Abraham. Why did Bahaullah need to have a Maiden appear in the Prison to announce His mission if He already knew about it at birth? Did He as an enfant only pretend to at first be unable to talk, and then to learn how? This seems beneath all dignity to me. I believe the Heavenly Maiden is the Divine Nature of Baha'u'llah Himself. My reply: Fair enough, but Still why any announcement at all if He already knew it? Did He keep Himself in the dark (at Will, so to speak)? This seems crazy to me. Isn't it infinitely more likely that He did not *know* in advance, because He had no way of knowing until God announced it to Him, just like Abram, Moses, and Muhammad? (yes and certainly Jesus too but I know of no scriptural evidence in His case). Isn't this the essence of Occam's Razor? The plain language of the Bible and Quran seem to tell us that most Manifestations did not know of their status until a specific point in their adulthood. I expect that on some level that is true. I think what you are missing in this whole discussion is the understanding that Manifestations have *both* a human and a divine nature. My reply: No, I understand that symbolically. I may not be able to describe it for you in words, better than it is already described by Baha'u'llah and Jesus Themselves. But I think you and many Baha'is do away 1005 with the human nature of Baha'u'llah and make him only a God, capable of anything and everything
Science and the Future of Religion
Applying the principle of Occam's razor, I like to use the simplest explanation possible. If a natural explanation for something exists, that is preferable to a more unlikely explanation that involves a breaking of natural laws. I think all of religion can be explained without the breaking of natural laws. This doesn't make it any less wonderful. It's sort of like this. Life is an emergent phenomenon. Consciousness is a higher level emergent phenomenon. At a higher level still, spirituality is an emergent phenomenon. The fact is, you can explain life and consciousness using the laws of science. You can do the same with spirituality and religion. So, I do not believe in what I call physical miracles; that is, violations of the scientific laws of the universe (such as gravity). That does not make spirituality and religion any less wonderful. Far from it. Just as life and consciousness are wonderful, even after we learn how they operate scientifically, we see them as emergent phenomena with significances and meaning beyond their mechanistic roots. While we may understand their mechanisms, we are in awe of their emergent actuality. So we can see the hand of God move within human society, but He moves through humans and within natural law. Our language is the result and expression of our consciousness, but there is no corresponding language yet for spirituality and religion. These are emergent phenomena of a whole other level. So we have no language in which to express our spirituality, other than metaphor, symbols, myth and hyperbole. Humanity has evolved with a sense of spirituality, and it needs to be expressed in a social and cultural form, an external religion. The existing, older religions, while certainly containing the inner spiritual core so necessary to mankind, carry too much historical baggage now of warfare and bloodshed, intolerance and backwardness. Baha'u'llah founded the Baha'i Faith as a renewed expression of that same eternal inner spiritual religion contained in the previous dispensations, but with the intent also that it be in harmony with science, reason and logic. He intended for the Baha'i Faith to unify the world. If we take too literal an understanding of the metaphors and symbols used by Baha'u'llah and our other Central Figures, we lose the potency of its intended role of uniting the world and harmonizing science and religion. Is it possible that this is one of the reasons why the Baha'i Faith today is so small in numbers and has stopped growing? Almost 200 years after the birth of Baha'u'llah, the Baha'i Faith is professed by less than .1% of the world's population, less than .01% of the USA population, and about .001% of the European population. In the USA, the number of new declarents is declining every year and is less than the actuarial replacement rate; in plain words, the number of Baha'is in the USA is declining at an increasingly rapid rate. Both the Christian and Islamic Faiths grew much faster in their early years, proportionally speaking. By the year 64 AD, Christianity was widely enough known to be blamed by Nero for the burning of Rome. By 300 AD, between 5% and 10% of the population of the Roman Empire were Christians. By 350 AD, the Roman Empire was Christian. In our own age, the Mormon church, founded at the same time as the Baha'i Faith, is larger in numbers and is still growing. The early Christian Church had a radical message of love and universal human dignity. The Islamic Faith had an equally compelling message of monotheism and social equity. I believe the Baha'i Faith can have an equally compelling message (for our day and age) of Unity; unity of religions and unity of mental world views, healing the rift between science and religion. In short, I believe that we are still failing to see the true scope of the revolutionary change that is necessary. I believe that we are doing ourselves a dis-service by emphasizing Entry by Troops, prophecy, and doctrinal uniformity. I believe we should be emphasizing the radical uniformity of the inner core of the world's spiritual traditions; the Baha'i Faith's capability to encompass all of that within a legitimate and authoritative historical tradition, without sacrificing anything core to the world's religions; the newfound capability of experiencing true spirituality without abandoning or short-circuiting science, reason and logic; and the possibility of using our powerful science and technology to build a new civilization that cherishes and encourages spirituality without superstition. __ 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web -
Re: The Iqan and Reason
Brent, Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful post. I find it very interesting and helpful in clarifying my own thinking. I want to think about it and respond more fully when I have more time, hopefully by tomorrow. But for now I will make just one short comment. Brent wrote: ...I may be missing your point, but it appears that your reading of that Book is that Bahaullah does not say in it that Scripture is infallible. Yet He twice (pp. 169 and 190) refers to the Quran as His unerring Book and on page 201 He states of the Quran its decrees are indisputable, and its promise unfailing, and finally, its guidance can never err I know that the Writings of Baha'u'llah talk about infallibility, including the Book of Certitude and perhaps most significantly in the Aqdas, the Most Holy Book. I have studied and meditated a lot about every reference to infallibility that I can find in the Writings. I therefore believe in infallibility. My understanding of the meaning of infallibility may differ from most Baha'is, but trust me on this, I have thought about it a lot and it would take far too long to explain my thoughts on that subject here. As to the quotes above to Baha'u'llah's reference to the Quran as His unerring book and of the Quran that its decrees are indisputable, and its promise unfailing, and finally, its guidance can never err I want to just comment that I accept that judgment. So, I believe that the the Quran and the Writings of Baha'u'llah are unerring and infallible. However, I do not think that the understanding of any individual (of passages in those Books) is unerring in any way whatsoever. So therefore any comment by anyone about a passage in those books is only human comment prone to all kinds of errors. Perhaps most crucially, however, I want to comment about the references by Baha'u'llah (found in the Iqan) to the dangers of a too strict literal interpretation of scripture. I believe that these dangers (of a too strict literal interpretation) apply equally strongly to our own Baha'i Writings. Perhaps many Baha'is will differ with me on this. It is really easy to see and accept the dangers of literal interpretations of previous scriptures, but it is also easy, I observe, to be arrogant about the literal truth, as we humans understand it, of our own dispensations' scriptures. Please keep in mind I do fully realize that some of our Writings are strictly literal; the most famous example is the 1000 year rule from the Kitab i Aqdas, teh only instance that I am aware of where Baha'u'llah explicitly stated that no understanding other than a literal one was acceptable. Again, thank you for your comments, Brent. Ron __ 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
Re: Not Exhausted
Hello Gilberto, I followed some of your discussions with Susan on another list, and I always thought that your comments and were very logical and well thought out. Ron Stephens __ 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
Re: Metaphorical Certitude
On Oct 11, 2004, at 6:22 PM, James Mock wrote: Regarding the following passage from your (Ron's) comments: This actually highlights the great honor and worth of those early followers of new religions who suffered and were martyred for the Cause. They took the supreme risk, for if they were wrong in their endorsement, they could have suffered and been martyred for a cause that was subsequently lost to history. How great a Faith it is to be martyred for a Metaphor. James Mock wrote: This premise assumes that such believers were not endowed with unique certitude by Baha'u'llah or already possessed unique knowledge at the time of their acceptance, a premise which may not correctly characterize those blessed martyrs. Ron Stephens replies: Yes, that is true. But consider this: Who would have the greatest honor, a martyr who was endowed with supernatural certainty and proof of the correctness of his or her actions, and the certainty of his or her eternal reward; or, a martyr who acted on Faith alone, lacking proof or supernatural certainty? I do not pretend to know the answer to this question. It is curious that you should respond so quickly to this post, for my original post was inspired by a post of yours from several weeks ago, which I have been pondering and meditating upon ever since: James Mock wrote on September 29: In my recent studies of the Writings, I have come to find a lot of paradoxessituations where two apparently conflicting statements are madesuch as the most manifest of the manifest and the most hidden of the hidden, the two being opposites. I can cite numerous others too, such as the fact that tests are a healing medicine and at the same time, we are told to pray for protection from test. Why would one pray for protection from a healing medicine? The Hidden Words tell us that the true lover yearneth for tests. What I have come to recognize is that every human being is part of a continuum of spiritual development. There is no such thing as diametric absolutes such as saved versus damned. I am begining to contend that even the labels of Baha'i and non-Baha'i may be misnomers. The terms may be useful for describing a registered member of the Faith and a non-member, but being a Baha'i, in itself, is not the be-all, end-all for spiritual development. So, James, I was most taken by your thoughts in the above quote, which was in a response to David about divorce, of all things. In meditating upon your thoughts as stated above, it seems to me that the Writings are an Oceanic Metaphor, representing all of spiritual reality, and thus they (the Writings) must contain paradoxes and contradictions, as does life and reality. We can no more pretend to prove our point (any point) by quoting a few sentences of the Writings than an oceanographer could prove that the Atlantic is made up of kelp, having found a piece of kelp in the ocean and flinging it up on dry land, and saying, See, I told you the ocean is made up of green vegetative material and not, as his worthy adversary in the culture wars had claimed, that the Atlantic was made up of mammalian fish-like creatures with big brains (having extracted a dolphin from another specimen taken from the Atlantic.) So likewise, we can fling sentences, or paragraphs, or pages of the Writings back and forth at each other (as we sometimes do) to prove our various points. But the truth lies in the sum of the whole Ocean, and not merely in its parts. It seems to me that God went out of His way to make sure that we humans lack any clear, definitive proofs about spiritual matters. If He had wanted us to know the exact truths about things with any certainty, then He could surely have arranged to make it so; instead, He keeps us guessing. He must have good reasons for this. __ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/[EMAIL PROTECTED] New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
