CHAPTER II: THE BAHÁ'Í CONCEPT OF RELIGIOUS UNITY
Every religion, according to 'Abdu'l-Bahá, has a particular focus, a
central theme around which all of its principles, teachings and laws turn. For
the Bahá'í Faith, this central theme "is the consciousness of the
oneness of mankind."
[1] Indeed, Shoghi Effendi
asserts that the oneness of humanity is the "the pivotal principle and
fundamental doctrine of the Faith ..." and the one "... round which all the
teachings of Bahá'u'lláh revolve."
[2] For Bahá'u'lláh, the members of the human
family, whether Caucasian, Asian, African and so on, are fundamentally one, the
same; with skin color or average height being superficial and unsubstantial
differences which in no wise contradict this basic unity.
An important element in the consciousness and appreciation of the oneness of
humanity is the Bahá'í principle of the unity of the world's
religions. For 'Abdu'l-Bahá, it is "the corner-stone" of the oneness of
all people and the
very foundation for its realization in the world of human affairs.
[3] Furthermore, Shoghi Effendi asserts that the
Bahá'í principle of the unity of the world's religious
traditions, with all of its ramifications, is "the fundamental principle
enunciated by Bahá'u'lláh."
[4]
The Bahá'í concept of religious unity may well be unique in the
history of religion, since unlike other similar views, it is one of the central
principles of the Bahá'í Faith and its direct and primary basis
is found within its own sacred writings as opposed to interpretations and
commentaries on such writings.
[5] Indeed, there
is no lack of scrip tural references to this important principle in the
Bahá'í canon, nor are such references obscure. In fact, an entire
volume, the
Kitáb-i-Iqán (Ar. "The Book of Certitude"), is
primarily devoted to this theme.
[6]
A problem arises, however, the moment one begins to review the literature
written by Bahá'í scholars on the theme of religious unity. It
seems that for Bahá'ís, the principle of religious unity is so
central to their faith, so obvious and compelling, that little if any writing
has been done on this subject. No theological discussion of its implications or
potential problems, has ever been thought through or worked out in any detail
within the Bahá'í community. Even in a recent
Bahá'í publication designed to serve as a possible textbook on
the Bahá'í Faith, a scant three pages are devoted to the
principle of religious unity.
[7] The discussion
that follows does little to deal with the very real and serious issues with
which such a position must grapple.
The Bahá'í view raises a number of questions. In those writings
where the principle of religious unity is mentioned it is often unclear what
the Bahá'í writings intend by the use of such phrases as "the
religions of God," "all religions," "the divine religions" or "all the
Prophets." Do such phrases mean what Muslims intend by the term
ahl
al-kitáb, literally "the people of the Book" (i.e. Jews, Christians,
Muslims, and perhaps Zoroastrians)? In many instances, the only examples cited
in the Bahá'í corpus are from these traditions. In fact, in the
sacred writings of the Báb and Bahá'u'lláh, these are the
only religious traditions mentioned. Or do such phrases also include the
religious traditions of Asia (e.g. Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Chinese
religions, and so on) since these faiths are occasionally mentioned, but only
in the writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House
of Justice? Or does the Bahá'í view also include the vast and
varied so-called "tribal," "indigenous," or "pre-literate" traditions of the
world as well? In any case, it raises questions about the very real and
profound differences that exist between the various religious traditions, let
alone those differ ences that exist within each one. Again, it may be that what
is intended by such phrases is not to be taken literally but symbolically. This
raises the further question of whether the Bahá'í view is a
descriptive statement about the world's religions or a symbolic one devoid of
any cognitive content? Is the Bahá'í view an assertion about the
true nature of religion, or a symbolic or mythological one designed to awaken
the importance of faith within an individual and provide a coherent world view
designed to foster better relations between Bahá'ís and the
people of other faiths? Despite the existence of a number of capable
Bahá'í scholars around the world, answers to these questions have
not been worked out in any detail.
Transcendent Unity
According to the Bahá'í view, the nature of reality is
ultimately a unity, in contrast to a view that would postulate a multiplicity
of differing or incommensurate realities. The nature of truth, according to the
Bahá'í writings, is thus fundamentally unitary and not
pluralistic. In a talk delivered in New York City in December of 1912,
'Abdu'l-Bahá states that "oneness is truth and truth is oneness which
does not admit of plurality."
[8] At a talk in
Paris early that year, 'Abdu'l-Bahá admits that "Truth has many aspects,
but it remains always and forever one."
[9]
The Bahá'í principle of the unity of religions is grounded on
this basic concep tion of reality. This principle, so frequently discussed in
the Bahá'í sacred writings, asserts that a common transcendent
truth not only lies above the varying and divergent religious traditions, but
is in fact, their ultimate source and inspiration. For example, The Báb,
claims in
The Book of Names (Ar.
Kitáb-i-Asmá) that
"every religion proceedeth from God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting"
while Bahá'u'lláh, in referring to the religions of the world,
writes that "These principles and laws, these firmly-established and mighty
systems, have proceeded from one Source, and are rays of one Light."
[10] In the most direct and concise passage on the
subject that I am aware of, Bahá'u'lláh maintains that the
revelation which each Manifestation or Messenger of God receives "is exalted
above the veils of plurality and the exigencies of number."
[11] Finally, in
The Most Holy Book (Ar.
Kitáb-i-Aqdas) Bahá'u'lláh even refers to God as
"the Lord of all Religions."
[12]
It should be clear from the passages quoted above that the
Bahá'í principle of religious unity affirms the existence of a
common transcendent source from which the world's religious traditions
originate and receive their inspiration. As such, the Bahá'í view
is remarkably similar to the thought of Frithjof Schuon, a Swiss scholar of
religion who persuasively argues for what he terms the "transcendent unity of
religions" which he claims is the foundation of and lies at the very heart of
every religious tradition.
[13] Like the
Bahá'í Faith, Schuon holds that the religions of the world
originate from the same ultimate source. "The Divine Will," writes Schuon, "has
distributed the one Truth under different forms or, to express it in another
way, between different humanities" or cultures.
[14] Writing on the same subject and with similar language,
Bahá'u'lláh insists that
There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever
race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are
the subjects of one God. The difference between the ordinances under which they
abide should be attributed to the varying requirements and exigencies of the
age in which they were revealed.[15]
It should be obvious from this reference that Bahá'u'lláh, like
Schuon, is not affirming that all religions are the same, for He alludes to the
differences between them. Indeed, He claims that the religions of the world
only seem to be dissimilar due to "the varying requirements of the ages in
which they where promulgated."
[16] In other
words, the apparent differences that exist among the various religious
traditions are due to particular cultural and historical factors.
While this explanation is widely appealed to throughout the
Bahá'í writings, it is certainly not unique to the
Bahá'í Faith. Such factors have been recognized and discussed by
a number of scholars of religion. For instance, the philosopher of religion,
Patrick Burke, argues that
The principle by which religions resemble and differ from one another is not
religious, but cultural. Similarities and differences between religions are
similarities and differences between cultures.... It is these cultural elements
that confer on any particular religion its distinctive identity.... What appear
to be conflicts between religious faiths must be seen then, first and foremost
as conflicts between cultural values.[17]
Nevertheless, the Bahá'í writings are quite explicit that such
differences are not intrinsic with nor innate to the ultimate source of these
religions. Thus, in Bahá'u'lláh's concluding remarks about the
prophets of God -- the founders of the world's religions -- He argues
It is clear and evident, therefore, that any apparent variation in the
intensity of their light is not inherent in the light itself, but should rather
be attributed to the varying receptivity of an ever-changing world. Every
Prophet Whom the Almighty and Peerless Creator hath purposed to send to the
peoples of the earth hath been entrusted with a Message, and charged to act in
a manner that would best meet the requirements of the age in which He
appeared.[18]
The Twofold Nature of Every Religion
While the Bahá'í principle of religious unity does not claim
that all the religions are the same, it does claim that they all share certain
fundamental and essential features which are distinguished from other
nonessential aspects related to the historical, cultural and linguistic context
in which each religious tradition develops. Consequently, the
Bahá'í writings, while recognizing the existence of religious
diversity, seek to explain it as secondary to an essential transcendent unity
common to all religious traditions. For example, in a talk delivered at the
Church of the Ascension, in New York City, on June 2, 1912, 'Abdu'l-Bahá
presents an often repeated explanation of the Bahá'í view of
religious unity, a view which is known as "the twofold nature of religion":
The religions of God have the same foundation, but the dogmas appearing later
have differed. Each of the divine religions has two aspects. The first is
essential. It concerns morality and development of the virtues of the human
world. This aspect is common to all. It is fundamental; it is one; there is no
difference, no variation in it. As regards the inculcation of morality and the
development of human virtues, there is no difference whatsoever between the
teachings of Zoroaster, Jesus and Bahá'u'lláh. In this they
agree; they are one. The second aspect of the divine religions is nonessential.
It concerns human needs and undergoes change in every cycle according to the
exigency of the time.[19]
The Bahá'í concept of the twofold nature of religion
distinguishes between two basic aspects that are held to be characteristic of
every religious tradition: the first is characterized as "essential" or
"fundamental" and refers to spiritual matters, while the second is
characterized as "nonessential" or "accidental" and refers to matters related
to the material or physical world. The essential aspect consists of
"fundamental" and "universal truths" which are considered to be changeless and
eternal and which constitute "the one foundation of all the religions of
God."
[20] These universal truths lie at the
core of every religious tradition and, according to the Bahá'í
writings, consist of faith in God (or in nontheistic terms, ultimate reality),
existential truths of life, the awakening of human potential, and the
acquisition of spiritual attributes or virtues.
[21] On the acquisition of such virtues, John Hick argues that
"love, compassion, generous concern for and commitment to the welfare of others
is a central ideal" in each of the world's religious traditions.
[22]
In contrast, the nonessential aspect of religion involves the outward form of
religious practice and operates within the sphere of linguistic, cultural and
historical circumstances. Indeed, 'Abdu'l-Bahá argues that the "divine
religions of the Holy Manifestations of God are in reality one though in name
and nomenclature they differ."
[23] In
addition, the nonessential aspect further consists of the social laws and
regulations governing human affairs as well as ritual practices and doctrinal
beliefs, which vary in every age and culture and even within any one religious
tradition, as Wilfred Cantwell Smith has so persuasively argued.
[24] For example, most if not all religious traditions place
great importance on the institution of marriage and the role of the family, but
they all differ on the particulars of the marriage ceremony; the rights and
obligations of the husband, wife, and children; and the circumstances under
which divorce is granted.
The distinction made between the essential and nonessential aspects of
religion is not unique to Bahá'í theology. It resembles closely
the "form versus content" or "accident versus essence" debate over the content
of myth. In his comprehensive four volume work on mythology,
The Masks of
God, Joseph Campbell makes the distinction between what he calls the local
manifestation of myth and ritual within a particular culture (what the
Bahá'í writings call the nonessential or accidental aspects) and
the universal aspects (what the Bahá'í writings refer to as the
essential or fundamental aspects) which go beyond what is historically and
culturally determined.
[25] As is the case with
the Bahá'í view, it is the local manifestations of the universal
aspects that differ and seem at variance with one another. Campbell based his
conception of the local and universal aspects of myth on the earlier work of
the German sociologist Adolf Bastian (1826-1905) who distinguished between what
he called the "elementary ideas" (
Elementargedanke) that are found
worldwide from their local manifestations in what he termed "ethnic ideas"
(
Volkergedanke).
Faith: A Common Denominator
In addition to the recognition of a transcendent unity of religions, the
Bahá'í writings also emphasize the process of personal
transformation brought about through faith as a unifying factor in all
religious traditions. For this reason, the Bahá'í scriptures make
a distinction between institutionalized religion, which involves ritual
performance, traditional practice, and accumulated doctrine, and faith -- that
deeply personal attitude, feeling and inward response of an individual to the
transcendent, a response that usually has a powerful transforming effect on an
individual and expresses itself in outward practice and belief.
In the Bahá'í sacred writings, the Arabic word
imán is usually translated into English as the word
faith.
26 According to the Islámic scholar Cyril
Glasse,
imán refers to "those articles of belief which are part
of Islam" such as "faith in God, His Angels, His books (revelations), His
Prophets, and the Day of Judgement.
[27]
Imán is also under stood as one of three aspects that make up
Islám as religion (Ar.
dín), those other two being
Islám (the rites, practices, and laws) and
ihsán
(lit. "virtue" or "excellence"). However, as with the corresponding English
terms
religion and
faith;
imán,
Islám, and
dín are often used ambiguously and
interchangeably. Despite such ambiguity, philoso phers, theologians, and
scholars of religion often distinguish between the concepts of faith on the one
hand and religion or practice on the other.
Shoghi Effendi often draws a distinction between faith and religion in his
letters to individual Bahá'ís. In such letters he frequently
contrasts those Bahá'ís "whose religion is Bahá'í,"
those who merely "accept and observe the teachings" or who call themselves
Bahá'ís, from those "who live for the Faith," whose lives are
transformed, "ennobled and enlightened."
[28]
He further clarifies this difference by contrasting "spiritual awareness"
(personal faith) with "administrative procedure" and "adherence to rules"
(institutionalized religion). For example, he writes that
The need is very great, everywhere in the world, in and outside the
[Bahá'í] Faith, for a true spiritual awareness to pervade and
motivate people's lives. No amount of administrative procedure or adherence to
rules can take the place of this soul-characteristic, this spirituality which
is the essence of man.[29]
Indeed, the Guardian characterizes such spiritual awareness as "that mystical
feeling which unites man with God" and which, he declares, is at "the core of
religious faith."
[30] Elsewhere he maintains
that
The Bahá'í Faith, like all other Divine Religions, is thus
fundamentally mystic in character. Its chief goal is the development of the
individual and society, through the acquisition of spiritual virtues and
powers. It is the soul of man which first has to be fed. And this spiritual
nourishment prayer can best provide. Laws and institutions, as viewed by
Bahá'u'lláh, can become really effective only when our inner
spiritual life has been perfected and transformed. Otherwise religion will
degenerate into mere organization, and become a dead thing.[31]
He further claims that the fundamental purpose of religion
is to bring man nearer to God, and to change his character, which is of the
utmost importance. Too much emphasis is often laid on the social and economic
aspects of the Teachings; but the moral aspect cannot be overemphasized.[32]
Once again, it is the moral life and the personal response of the individual to
divinity that is considered the basis of the religious life; a life that must
be transformed through the acquisition of virtues and the spiritual nourishment
of prayer and meditation, and not the mere adherence to various doctrines and
teachings, nor the pious participation in ceremonies and rituals, holidays and
commemorations. Thus, Shoghi Effendi, in a letter written on his behalf to an
individual believer, distills down the essence of the Bahá'í view
to the following statement:
Every other Word of Bahá'u'lláh's and 'Abdu'l-Bahá's
Writings is a preachment on moral and ethical conduct; all else is the form,
the chalice, into which the pure spirit must be poured; without the spirit and
the action which must demonstrate it, it is a lifeless form.[33]
This distinction between the spirit and the form of religious faith, is echoed
in the words of the great Hindu teacher Sri Ramakrishna when he pleads
Do not care for doctrines, do not care for dogmas, or sects, or churches, or
temples; they count for little compared with the essence of existence in each
[person], which is spirituality ... Earn that first, acquire that, criticise no
one, for all doctrines and creeds have some good in them.[34]
Thus, it should be clear that when the Bahá'í writings declare
that the religious traditions share certain fundamental and essential aspects,
it is primarily the transform ing power of faith and its effects upon the
individual and upon society as a whole that is meant. In other words, it is the
religious life itself, the process of transformation which brings the
individual nearer to God or ultimate reality, that is considered an essential
feature of every religion. And while the particular path or outward expression
may vary, it is the result or goal, and the process which leads to it, that are
held to be the same. To take an obvious analogy: there are many paths and
approaches that may be used to scale a difficult and challenging mountain
(differences in technique, equipment used, and so on) but they all share a
common goal -- reaching the summit.
[35] Or,
seen from a more philosophical perspective, Hick has effectively argued that
the great world faiths embody different perceptions and conceptions of, and
correspondingly different responses to, the Real or the Ultimate from within
the major variant cultural ways of being human; and that within each of them
the transformation of human existence from self-centredness to
Reality-centredness is manifestly taking place -- and taking place, so far as
human observation can tell, to much the same extent. Thus the great religious
traditions are to be regarded as alternative soteriological 'spaces' within
which, or 'ways' along which, men and women can find
salvation/liberation/enlightenment/fulfillment.[36]
Accordingly, for Hick, while the various religious traditions differ in terms
of their outward expression or linguistic form, in their attempts to describe
and approach "the Real" (his general term for divinity or the absolute) and to
transform individual lives, yet they all appear to be involved in a similar
process. Perhaps, too, this is what Ramakrishna was referring to when he
suggests that
As one and the same water, is called by different names in different
languages, one calling it "water," another "Vatri," a third "aqua," and a
fourth "Pani," so the one Sachchidananda, Absolute Being-Intelligence-Bliss, is
invoked by some as God, by some as Allah, by some as Hari, and by others as
Brahman.... As one can ascend to the roof of a house by means of a ladder or a
bamboo, or a staircase or in various other ways, so diverse are the ways and
means to approach God. Every religion in the world is one of the ways to reach
Him.[37]
In all of the cases that I have considered thus far, it is terminology and
outward practice that are held to differ, while the process, the conscious and
active life of faith and its effects on the individual, is declared as being
common to the various religious traditions. Similarly, in his influential book
The Meaning and End of Religion, Smith argues that
... faith differs in form, but not in kind. This applies both within
communities and from one community to another. My observation, as a historian
of religion, would be put thus: in so far as he or she has been saved, the
Muslim has been saved by Islamic faith (faith of an Islamic form, through
Islamic patterns; faith mediated by an Islamic context); the Buddhist by
Buddhist faith, the Jew by Jewish.... just as Christians have been saved by
faith of a Christian form, so have Muslims by faith of an Islamic, Buddhists by
Buddhist.[38]
In this same work, Smith further demonstrates that while almost all cultures
have a word for faith or its equivalents (i.e. piety, religiosity, reverence),
very few have a term corresponding to the Western notion of religion as an
empirical phenomenon and an overt system of principles and practices separate
from other aspects of life.
[39] In fact, Smith
argues that when a culture coins a word for 'religion' as an overt abstract
system, it is well on its way to losing sight of the importance of faith.
As I have argued, the Bahá'í writings contrast faith with
religion, that system of practices and traditions, rites and beliefs, that, if
followed only in an outward sense, often degenerates into a mere organization.
It is religion as mere organization, devoid of the transforming power of faith,
that the Bahá'í writings point to as the source of so much of the
diversity, conflict and dissension that often characterize the religious
traditions of the world. 'Abdu'l-Bahá, in his talks given in America,
constantly argues this point. For instance, in his talk delivered to the
Universalist Church of Washington D.C. in 1912, he maintains that
The foundations of the divine religions are one. If we investigate these
foundations, we discover much ground for agreement, but if we consider the
imitations of forms and ancestral beliefs, we find points of disagreement and
division; for these limitations differ while the sources and foundations are
one in the same.[40]
Later that year, in a talk delivered at the Foyer de L'ame in Paris,
'Abdu'l-Bahá reiterates this point
All these divisions we see on all sides, all these disputes and opposition,
are caused because men cling to ritual and outward observances, and forget the
simple, underlying truth. It is the outward practices of religion that
are so different, and it is they that cause disputes and enmity -- while the
reality is always the same, and one. The Reality is the Truth, and truth
has no division.[41]
Consequently, it should be clear that the Bahá'í concept of
religious unity is not some isolated or obscure notion, since it has its
parallel expressions in such diverse thinkers as Ramakrishna, Hick, Schuon,
Campbell, and W. C. Smith. It is equally clear that the Bahá'í
concept is not so much about the existence of similar doctrines or beliefs, but
rather about the transformation which religion is capable of bringing about in
the moral and religious life of an individual -- a life transformed and
animated by and through the power of faith.
Exegesis of Important Terms and Phrases
A full understanding of the Bahá'í principle of religious unity
rests significantly upon how key Bahá'í terminology and phrases
are to be understood and interpreted. Since the majority of religious
terminology used in the Bahá'í scriptures is derived from
Islámic theology, most of the exegesis which follows will depend heavily
on Islámic sources.
To begin with, how are the phrases "all religions" and "all the Prophets" --
both of which are used in the Bahá'í scriptures to refer
collectively to the world's religions -- to be interpreted? These phrases
together with similar ones such as "the divine religions" or "the religions of
God" are the usual English translations of the corresponding Arabic or Persian
terms. The phrase "all religions" is the English translation of the Arabic
al-adyan kulliha and the Persian
jami'-yi adyan.
42
Adyan is the plural of
dín, the Arabic and Persian word
for "religion," while
kulliha and
jami are the Arabic and Persian
words for "all."
[43] Islámic sources
define
dín as "'religion' in the broadest sense," thus, it "may
mean any religion" or even religious knowledge as opposed to intellectual
knowledge; but it is primarily used in the Qur'án to refer to "the
religion of Islám" (Ar.
dín al-Islám).
[44] When other religions are mentioned in the
Qur'án, the Arabic word
milla (lit. "religion" or "sect") is
used; however, this meaning is now largely obsolete in the Arabic speaking
world.
[45] Nevertheless, the phrase "all
religions" and its variants is still unclear, for it is not immediately obvious
what religious traditions are intended by such phrases.
As a partial clarification, the authoritative writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá
and Shoghi Effendi do include the names of other religions. For example, in the
letters written in English and on behalf of Shoghi Effendi there is reference
made to the "nine existing religions," those being the Bahá'í
Faith, the religion of the Báb, Hinduism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism,
Judaism, Christianity, Islám, and the religion of the Sabians.
[46] Within the Bahá'í scriptures,
the number nine is symbolic for completeness or wholeness because it is seen as
the completion or culmination of the single digit numbers. Consequently, the
use of the phrase "nine existing religions" metaphorically refers to all
religions, and while the Bahá'í writings recognize the
problematic and controversial nature of such a list, they do not consider these
nine religions as "the only true religions that have appeared in the world."
[47] In fact, other religious groups (e.g. "the
Confucianists," the Sikhs, and Native Americans) are mentioned in a positive
manner in the Bahá'í writings.
[48]
The reference to the Sabians as one of the "nine existing religions" is
obscure. However, the meaning of this term will shed light on what the
Bahá'í writings intend by such phrases as "all the religions."
The Sabians (Ar.
Sabi, pl.
Sabi'un; also spelled as 'Sabians')
are first mentioned in the Qur'án (2:59, 5:73, and 22:17), but their
identity is problematic. The Qur'án identifies the Sabians, along with
the Jews and the Christians (and by implication, the Zoroastrians) as
ahl
al-Kitáb (lit. "the people of the book"), those who have received
revealed scriptures.
The Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam states that two
distinct groups have been identified with this name:
1. the Mandaeans or Subbas, a Judeo-Christian sect practicing the rites of
baptism in Mesopotamia (Christians of John the Baptist); 2. The Sabaeans of
Harran, a pagan sect which survived for a considerable period under Islam
...
A positive identification of the Sabians is further hampered by the fact that
many groups, upon encountering Islám, often claimed to be the Sabians
mentioned in the Qur'án in order to be under the Qur'ánic
privileges and protection associated with the
ahl al-Kitáb.
Furthermore, sympathetic Muslims frequently employed the term upon encountering
peoples of diverse religious faiths. Accordingly, the designation "Sabians," as
it is used in the Islámic world, appears to be inclusive in nature, and
may thus be used in reference to any religion not specifically mentioned in the
Qur'án. Indeed, Glasse, in summing up the problems associated with the
term, concludes
The very fact that many different groups were assimilated to the name and
that it is impossible to fix the Koranic term definitely to any one of them,
suggests that the concept of the Sabians was an open door for the toleration to
any religion which upon examination appeared to be an authentic way of
worshipping God.[49]
Moreover, since the term
Sabians was applied to so-called "pagan"
groups (religions other than Christianity, Judaism or Islám; or
religions that pre-date them) its use may best be interpreted as metaphorically
referring to all tribal or indigenous religions. This interpretation would
certainly make better sense of the Bahá'í listing of the "nine
existing religions," since tribal or pre-literate religions, which number some
ninety-two million people world wide,
[50]
don't appear to be directly mentioned otherwise.
In the Bahá'í scriptures, the phrases "all the Prophets" or "all
the Prophets of God" are often used to refer collectively to various prophets,
or to use the Bahá'í term, "manifestations" (Ar.
mazhar,
"manifestation" of the essence of God) -- those extraordi nary individuals who
initiated and founded the various religious traditions.
[51] Such phrases are the English translations of the Persian
jami' anbiyá.
Anbiyá is the plural of the Arabic
and Persian word
nabí, meaning a prophet, that is, one "whose
mission lies within the framework of an existing religion" (i.e. Ezekiel or
Isaiah), as opposed to a
rasúl ("Messenger" or "Envoy," pl.
rusúl), one "who brings a new religion or major new revelation,"
such as Christ or Muhammad.
[52] In the
Qur'án, a
nabí is also called a
bashir ("he who
brings glad-tidings") and a
nadhir ("a warner"). Rusúl are also
called
al- mursalin ("those who are sent"). In addition, the
Bahá'í scriptures also use the Persian phrases
mazahir-i
jami'ih ("the all-embracing Manifestations") and
hamih mursalund
("all the Messengers") when referring to the prophets of God.
[53]
According to the British historian of religion, Geoffrey Parrinder, the
Qur'án mentions twenty-eight prophets and messengers by name (see
Appendix B for a complete listing) -- including many of those mentioned in the
Hebrew Bible and Christian New Testament.
[54]
The Qur'án, however, does not seem to limit their number to
twenty-eight. In fact, it indicates that there have been countless prophets
sent throughout the history of the human race. For many of these prophets, the
details of their lives are lost in the mists of ancient history and prehistory.
In reference to these prophets the Qur'án states:
And We have already sent Messengers [Ar. rusúl] before Thee
[Muhammad]: of some We have told Thee, and others We have told Thee nothing ...
(Qur'án 40:78, see also Qur'án 4:162)
And there never was a people without a Warner [Ar. nadhir] having lived
among them. (Qur'án 35:24)
No doubt on this basis, later Islámic theologians and scholars put the
number of prophets much higher than twenty-eight, by some accounts as high as
224,000. Indeed, even in the Ahadíth, the collected sayings of Muhammad,
the number of prophets is symbolically said to be 124,000, a number so large as
to both dazzle the imagination and prevent humanity from claiming that it was
not adequately warned of universal judgement.
[55]
Like the Qur'án, the Bahá'í scriptures contain the names
of a number of prophets and messengers. To be precise, at least thirty-two
prophets are mentioned by name in the Bahá'í writings,
twenty-three of which are identical to those mentioned in the Qur'án
(see Appendix B for a complete listing). What is significantly different about
the prophets named in the Bahá'í writings is, whereas the
Qur'án names only prophets associated with the Judeo-Christian-Muslim
heritage, the Bahá'í scriptures include "prophets" or
"messengers" from Asian cultures -- for example, Zoroaster (Zarathustra), The
Buddha, and Krishna.
Also like the Qur'án, the Bahá'í writings do not limit
the number of prophets to thirty-two. Thus the Báb declares that "God
hath raised up Prophets and revealed Books as numerous as the creatures of the
world, and will continue to do so to everlasting."
[56] This would, theoretically at least, make the number of
prophets practically infi nite, or at the very least, even larger than the
highest numbers mentioned in Islám. In fact, Shoghi Effendi, while
quoting from the writings of Bahá'u'lláh, asserts that
From the "beginning that has no beginning," these Exponents of the Unity of
God and Channels of His incessant utterance [the prophets of God] have shed the
light of the invisible Beauty upon mankind, and will continue, to the "end that
hath no end," to vouchsafe fresh revelations of His might and additional
experiences of His inconceivable glory. To contend that any particular religion
is final, that "all Revelation is ended, that the portals of Divine mercy are
closed, that from the Daysprings of eternal holiness no sun shall rise again,
that the ocean of everlasting bounty is forever stilled, and that out of the
Tabernacle of ancient glory the Messengers of God have ceased to be made
manifest" would indeed be nothing less than sheer blasphemy.[57]
Clearly then, the Bahá'í writings recognize the existence of vast
numbers of prophets or manifestations whom have appeared in all cultures
throughout the entire history of the human race. Thus, given such references,
the phrase "all the prophets" is best interpreted as broadly and as open ended
as possible. Such an interpretation would include all known historical
prophets, messengers and founders of the world's religions, whether of the
past, present or future, together with all those whose identity has now been
lost. Likewise, the phrase "all religions" should also be interpreted in the
widest possible context to include all known existing religions together with
those which are no longer practiced.
Footnotes
[1] Qtd. in Shoghi Effendi, The Promised
Day is Come (Wilmette, IL: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1980), p.
119.
[2] God Passes By (Wilmette, IL:
Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1944), p. 281 and The World Order of
Bahá'u'lláh (Wilmette, IL: Bahá'í Publishing
Trust, 1974), p. 43.
[3] Qtd. in Shoghi Effendi, The World
Order of Bahá'u'lláh, p. 39.
[4] The Promised Day is Come, p.
v.
[5] John Hick notes that the principle of
religious unity, whether inclusivistic or pluralis tic (see Chapter 3 for the
definitions of these terms) are found "within each of the world's religions,
although not as central themes" ("Religious Pluralism," Encyclopedia of
Religion, Vol. 12, p. 331).
[6] The
Kitáb-i-Íqán together with the
Kitáb-i-Aqdas (Ar. "The Most Holy Book," the book of
Bahá'í law) are considered the two most important works of
Bahá'u'lláh. In addition, numerous individual writings of both
Bahá'u'lláh and 'Abdu'l-Bahá discuss the concept of
religious unity. This principle is also one of the constant themes in the
public talks given by 'Abdu'l-Bahá, and it is also discussed in some
length in the letters of Shoghi Effendi.
[7] William S. Hatcher and J. Douglas
Martin. The Bahá'í Faith: The Emerging Global Religion
(San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1984), pp. 81-84.
[8] The Promulgation of Universal
Peace (1939; rpt. Wilmette, IL: Bahá'í Publishing Trust,
1982), p. 454.
[9] Paris Talks, 11th ed. (1912; rpt.
London: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1972), p. 53.
[10] The Báb, Selections from the
Writings of the Báb (Bahá'í World Centre (Haifa,
Israel: Bahá'í World Centre, 1976), p. 139 and
Bahá'u'lláh, The Epistle to the Son of the Wolf (Wilmette,
IL: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1976), p. 13. The Epistle to the
Son of the Wolf was written in 1892, about a year before
Bahá'u'lláh's death, making it the last of His books. It is
significant in that it represents Bahá'u'lláh's own summary of
the salient features and central themes of the religious process He Himself set
in motion.
[11]
Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 153.
[12] The Kitáb-i-Aqdas: The Most
Holy Book (Haifa: Israel: Bahá'í World Centre, 1992), p. 32,
#35.
[13] The Transcendent Unity of
Religions (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1984). Even Schuon's
phrase "transcendent unity" appears frequently throughout the writings of
Bahá'u'lláh. See for instance Prayers and Meditations by
Bahá'u'lláh (Wilmette, IL: Bahá'í Publishing
Trust, 1974), pp. 89, 192-193, 307, and 334.
[14] The Transcendent Unity of
Religions, p. 17.
[15] Gleanings from the Writings of
Bahá'u'lláh (Wilmette, IL: Bahá'í Publishing
Trust, 1952), pp. 117-18.
[16] Ibid., pp. 79-80.
[17] The Fragile Universe (New
York: Barnes and Noble, 1979), pp. 40, 57.
[18] Gleanings, p. 79-80, #34. See
note 51, p. 39 in this chapter for a fuller discussion of the
Bahá'í concept of the prophet or manifestation of God.
[19] Promulgation, pp. 168-169.
[20] 'Abdu'l-Bahá, Foundations
of World Unity (Wilmette, IL: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1945),
pp. 92, 82.
[21] The Bahá'í writings
include among these virtues such traits as mercy, compassion, equity,
trustworthiness, wisdom, knowledge (including scientific knowledge), courtesy,
and kindness. So important is the acquisition of these virtues that when
'Abdu'l-Bahá, was asked in Paris, "What is the purpose of our lives?",
He responded, "To acquire virtues" (Paris Talks 177). For a
Bahá'í discussion on the universality of the so-called "golden
rule," see H.T.D. Rost, The Golden Rule: A Universal Ethic (Oxford:
George Ronald, 1986).
[22] An Interpretation of Religion:
Human Responses to the (New Haven, CT: Yale, 1989), p. 316. Hick devotes
the entire eighteenth chapter of this work demonstrating the universality of
this point.
[23] Promulgation, p. 151.
[24] Wilfred Cantwell Smith, Towards a
World Theology: Faith and the Comparative History of Religion (Louisville,
KY: Westminster Press, 1981),pp. 4-5.
[25] Primitive Mythology, Vol. I of
The Masks of God (New York: Penguin Books, 1969), p. 32.
26 Kambiz Rafraf, conversations with the author, March 1992.
[27] Concise Encyclopedia of Islam
(New York: HarperCollins, 1989), p. 187.
[28] Excerpts from the Writings of the
Guardian on the Bahá'í Life, comp. by The Universal House of
Justice (National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of Canada, n.
d.), pp. 18, 10; and Hornby, Lights of Guidance, p. 418, #1139.
[29] Excerpts p. 12.
[30] Qtd. in Hornby, Lights of
Guidance, p. 418, #1139.
[31] Ibid., p. 81, #247.
[32] Ibid., p. 417, #1136.
[33] From a letter dated September 30,
1949, in Hornby, Lights of Guidance, #1159.
[34] Qtd. in Vivekananda, Ramakrishna
and His Message, 1971., p. 25.
[35] For a full account of this analogy
see Ronald Eyer's illuminating discussion in his book Ronald Eyre on the
Long Search (Cleveland: William Collins, 1979) pp. 275-76.
[36] Problems of Religious
Pluralism (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1985) pp. 36-37.
[37] Teachings of Sri Ramakrishna,
compiled by Swami Abhedananda (1905; rpt. Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1975), p.
248, #686, p. 251, #694.
[38] Wilfred Cantwell Smith, The
Meaning and End of Religion (New York: New American, 1963), p. 168.
[39] Ibid., p. 53.
[40] Promulgation, p. 41.
[41] Paris Talks, pp. 120-21.
42 For example, see Bahá'u'lláh, Epistle to the
Son of the Wolf, pp. 80, 158; Bahá'u'lláh, Tablets of
Bahá'u'lláh, pp. 22, 87, 205; and Bahá'u'lláh,
Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 40.
[43] Todd Lawson, letter to the author,
dated May 28, 1992.
[44] H. A. R. Gibb and J.H. Krammers,
eds., "Dín" and "Milla," Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam, 1953.
[45] F. Buhl and C. E. Bosworth, "Milla,"
The New Encyclopedia of Islam, 1990. The word milla, as far as I
know, is not used in the Bahá'í writings.
[46] From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi
Effendi dated July 28, 1936, quoted in Hornby, Lights of Guidance, #829.
'Abdu'l-Bahá also mentions these religions in many of his public talks
in America and Europe (see Paris Talks and The Promulgation of
Universal Peace).
[47] From two letters written on behalf of
Shoghi Effendi. The first is dated October 28, 1949 and the other is dated July
28, 1936. Both letters are in Hornby, Lights of Guidance, #831 and
#829.
[48] In reference to the "Confucianists,"
'Abdu'l-Bahá attests that "Confucius renewed morals and ancient virtues
...", however, He goes on to argue that the beliefs and rites of the
Confucianists have diverged greatly from the fundamental teachings of Confucius
(Some Answered Questions [Wilmette, IL.: Bahá'í Publishing
Trust, 1981], p. 165. In the so-called "Tablet of Purity," 'Abdu'l-Bahá,
while not mentioning the Sikhs by name, commends then as a community of people
"far and away superior to others" due to their strict avoidance of alcohol,
opium and tobacco, as well as for their strength, courage, health, and physical
beauty (in Selections from the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá [Haifa,
Israel: Bahá'í World Centre, 1978], p. 150). In the Tablets of
the Divine Plan, 'Abdu'l-Bahá compares the Native American Indians
of today with the seventh century pre-Islámic Arabs who, when inspired
by the teachings of Muhammad, illumined the whole world" ([Wilmette, IL:
Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1977], p. 32-33). Elsewhere in the
writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi predictions are made that
the Aboriginal peoples of the Americas will play a major role in the
spiritualization of the planet.
[49] Concise Encyclopedia of Islam.
[50] Barrett, David B. "World Religious
Statistics." 1992 Britannica Book of the Year.
[51] The Bahá'í concept of the
"manifestation" of God is not one of divine incarna tion (Ar. hulul,
lit. "indwelling") where the essence of God descends into human form like the
Christian concept of Christ or that of the avatara in the Vaishnavite
tradition of Hinduism. Rather, the Bahá'í view likens the
manifestation of God to a perfectly polished mirror which reflects or manifests
the attributes of God. Thus, in such a view, God remains utterly transcendent,
above ascent or descent, incarnation or indwelling, while the manifestation of
god is understood as a unique human being capable of reflecting a perfect image
of the attributes of God. Bahá'u'lláh, in a discussion of the
nature of the manifestation, explains: "However, let none construe these
utterances to be anthropomorphism, nor see in them the descent of the worlds of
God into the grades of the creatures; nor should they lead thine Eminence to
such assumptions. For God is, in His Essence, holy above ascent and descent,
entrance and exit; He hath through all eternity been free of the attributes of
human creatures, and ever will remain so" (The Seven Valleys [Wilmette,
IL: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1975], pp. 22-23). For a more
complete discussion of the Bahá'í concept of the manifestation
see Juan Ricardo Cole, "The Concept of Manifestation in the
Bahá'í Writings," Bahá'í Studies, Vol. 9
(Ottawa: Association for Bahá'í Studies, 1982).
[52] Glasse, The Concise Encyclopedia of
Islam, p. 318.
[53] Lawson, letter to the author, dated May
28, 1992. A good discussion of these terms is also found in Seena Fazel and
Khazeh Fananapazir, "A Bahá'í Approach to the Claim of Finality
in Islam," which will be published in a forthcoming volume of the Journal of
Bahá'í Studies.
[54] Jesus in the Qur'án (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1977), p. 40.
[55] Glasse, The Concise Encyclopedia of
Islam, p. 318.
[56] An excerpt from the
Dalá'il-i-Sab'ih (Ar. "The Seven Proofs"), in Selections from
the Writings of the Báb, p. 125.
[57] World Order of
Bahá'u'lláh, p. 58.