Category Archives: Bahá’í

My religion of birth

Our Daily Bread: Zero-sum Salvation

by kaweah

Salvation, as religions generally have it, is a fundamentally selfish pursuit. One can make a strong case, though, that in Zoroastrianism, personal salvation ultimately depends on world renewal, that is, the salvation of the world. In the following slice, Bahá’u’lláh appears to promise a follower (of Zoroastrian origin, as it happens) that all he need do is abandon the people of the world to be exalted above all men:

Renounce and forsake the people of the world. O wise one! Shouldst thou heed the counsel of thy Lord, thou wouldst be released from the bondage of His servants and behold thyself exalted above all men. —Tabernacle of Unity, ¶5.6

It appears that it would not be enough to make salvation a mere selfish pursuit; it must be a competition. Hence, salvation in the Bahá’í religion is not purely solipsistic (as Christopher Hitchens would have it), because it appears that there can be no winners if there are no losers. Salvation is a zero-sum game. Someone has to be left behind.

Our Daily Bread: Narcissus

by kaweah

It is evident that, for all of his faults, Bahá’u’lláh had no lack of self-esteem:

Would ye laugh to scorn and contend with Him, a single hair of Whose head excelleth, in the sight of God, all that are in the heavens and all that are on the earth?
—Suriy-i-Haykal (Sura of the Temple)

This passage helps us to understand why Bahá’u’lláh let his hair grow so wildly, in spite of forbidding long hair in his book of laws.

This “Sura of the Temple” is also known as the “Sura of the Body”.

John Walbridge writes:

In the Súratu’l-Haykal the primary sense of haykal is the human body, particularly the body of the Manifestation of God, …

Adib Taherzadeh reported in Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh that Bahá’u’lláh wrote that he was both the author and the addressee of this Tablet. We can almost hear Bahá’u’lláh crying into the reflection pool, “make Me to be thine Idol!”

For more information, see Tablet of the Temple by Jonah Winters.

Our Daily Bread: From Divorce to Global Prosperity

by kaweah

In the Sura of Women, Gabriel instructs men on marital separation (divorce?):

And if a woman fears ill usage or desertion on the part of her husband, there is no blame on them, if they effect a reconciliation between them, … (4.127)

Gabriel acknowledges that a man cannot always treat all of his wives equally:

And ye will not have it at all in your power to treat your wives alike, even though you fain would do so; … (4.128)

Gabriel concludes that separation is sometimes perrmissable, and that though resources be divided, God can compensate them:

But if they separate, God can compensate both out of His abundance; … (4.129)

It does not seem entirely inappropriate for Bahá’u’lláh to use this passage in a mystical treatise, but it seems a bit of a stretch:

He burneth away the veils of want, and with inward and outward eye, perceiveth within and without all things the day of: “God will compensate each one out of His abundance.” (The Seven Valleys)

What is this about a “day”? Where did that come from? Is Bahá’u’lláh really quoting the Sura of Women, as all three publications explicitly indicate?

The invention persists in other compositions:

In this station he beholdeth himself established upon the throne of independence and the seat of exaltation. Then will he comprehend the meaning of that which hath been revealed of old concerning the day “whereon God shall enrich all through His abundance” (Gems of Divine Mysteries)

In yet another case, he goes further yet, employing the same invention to fully transform Gabriel’s assurances for irreconcilable marriages into a promise of global prosperity (albeit conditional on global justice) that sounds nothing like the doomsday of the Qur’án:

Were mankind to be adorned with [justice], they would behold the day-star of the utterance, ‘On that day God will satisfy everyone out of His abundance,’ shining resplendent above the horizon of the world. (Words of Paradise)

Verses from the Cow

by kaweah

Here be Bahá’u’lláh’s most commonly cited verses from the Sura of the Cow, his favorite chapter of the Qur’án.

Although they had before prayed for victory over those who believed not, yet when there came unto them He of Whom they had knowledge, they disbelieved in Him. The curse of God on the infidels! (2.89; Book of Certitude; Gems of Divine Mysteries)

Yea, damn those unbelievers! Even though they were educated, they didn’t become believers! How could that ever happen?

Wish ye then for death, if ye be men of truth. (2.94; Book of Certitude; Sura of the Temple)

Perhaps men should not fear death, but to wish for death is simply self-destructive. It is not heroic; it is suicidal.

Whichever way ye turn, there is the face of God. (2.109/115; Book of Certitude; Questions and Answers)

This is my hands-down favorite verse in the Qur’án, but I don’t believe that Bahá’u’lláh interpreted it as I do.

We did not appoint that which Thou wouldst have to be the Qiblih, but that We might know him who followeth the Apostle from him who turneth on his heels. (2.143; Book of Certitude; Tabernacle of Unity)

God helps those who blindly follow.

Verily we are God’s, and to Him shall we return. (2.151/156 Rodwell; The Seven Valleys; The Four Valleys; Gems of Divine Mysteries [twice]; Tabernacle of Unity)

I don’t mind this one, really, in a Heraclitean or Stoic, ekpyrotic sense.

What can such expect but that God should come down to them overshadowed with clouds? (2.210; Book of Certitude [2x])

Be they clouds of ignorance, cognitive dissonance, and idolatry? Yea, ’tis to be expected.

Fear God and God will give you knowledge. (2.282; Book of Certitude; The Seven Valleys; The Four Valleys; Gems of Divine Mysteries)

I have found that experience and reason have failed to support this assertion.

Some of the Apostles We have caused to excel the others. (2.253; Book of Certitude [2x]; Tabernacle of Unity)

And why should I care? Is this a spiritual education, medieval angelology, or fantasy league baseball?

No distinction do We make between any of His Messengers. (2.285; Book of Certitude; Tabernacle of Unity)

Again, what business is this of mine?

Top Ten Suras

by kaweah

It’s official! Here are the top ten suras in the Qur’án, according to Bahá’u’lláh:

The following list was compiled by calculating the ratio of citations to each sura in Bahá’u’lláh’s writings (AFAIK) to the number of verses in that sura, giving some slight weighting to the absolute number of citations. A verse used by Bahá’u’lláh is selected for each sura, with preference given to verses according to the number of times each was cited.

  1. The Cow (2): 42/286

    Verily we are God’s, and to Him shall we return.

  2. The Kneeling (45): 5/37

    And when he becometh acquainted with any of Our verses he turneth them to ridicule. There is a shameful punishment for them!

  3. The Spider (29): 9/69

    Whoso maketh efforts for Us, in Our ways shall We assuredly guide him.

  4. Abraham (14): 6/52

    We had sent Moses with Our signs, saying unto him: ‘Bring forth thy people from darkness into light and remind them of the days of God.’

  5. Cattle (6): 18/165

    SAY: “It is God:” then leave them to their pastime of cavillings.

  6. KAF (50): 5/45

    On that day will We cry to Hell, “art thou full?”, and it shall say, “are there more?”

  7. The Merciful (55): 7/78

    Verily, His ways differ every day.

  8. The Emigration (59): 4/24

    And be ye not like those who forget God, and whom He hath therefore caused to forget their own selves. These are the wicked doers.

  9. Iron (57): 4/29

    He is the first and the last; the seen and the hidden; and He knoweth all things!

  10. Man (76): 4/31

    Verily the righteous shall drink of a winecup tempered at the camphor fountain.


Honorable mention: The Made Plain (41) 5/54, The Family of Imran (3) 17/200, & Houd (11) 10/123.

Our Daily Bread: Bahá’ vs. the Priesthood

by kaweah

Today we have yet another slice from Tabernacle of Unity, addressed to a Bahá’í of Zoroastrian extraction:

This is not the day whereon the high priests can command and exercise their authority. In your Book it is stated that the high priests will, on that day, lead men far astray, and will prevent them from drawing nigh unto Him.

This is a peculiar statement for a man who had such a respectable following among Iranians of Zoroastrian background, but I suppose we shouldn’t blame him for wanting more.

As I’ve said before, I find it curious that Bahá’u’lláh used the words “your Book”, particular when writing to his own followers. It makes the author seem alien to the topic. He never spoke of Islamic or Christian scripture in such terms (AFAIK).

I’m no expert on the Avesta (the “Bible” of Zoroastrianism), but there is a translation in my possession, and I’ve read a fair bit of Zoroastrian scripture and commentary. I’m aware of a great deal of controversy surrounding the Zoroastrian priesthood, and I’m aware of many Zoroastrians who seem to be quite liberated from that priesthood, … but I’ve never heard of such a passage in the Avesta.

I recently asked a Zoroastrian who knows a lot more than me on this topic. She’s never heard of it either. She’s one of those modern Zoroastrians who’s convinced that early Zoroastrianism had no priesthood, and that the priesthood never had any authority, so the priesthood is not stopping her from embracing the Bahá’í Faith.

Hmmm. Must be something else.

Our Daily Bread: What Does God Look Like?

by kaweah

If there’s one verse from the Qur’án that I consider enlightened, it’s this:

Whichever way ye turn, there is the face of God. (2:109/115)

What an inclusive, compassionate sentiment!

I’m not certain that the author intended it to be translated as above (Rodwell), though this is the most literal translation as far as I know. Some translators have utilized more figurative meanings of the word wajh (face), such as “purpose”. Even then I would consider the verse enlightened. It comes out to something similar, but I like “face” better. It’s more intimate.

Bahá’ís might recognize this verse from the Book of Certitude and Questions and Answers, wherein the verse is associated with issues regarding the direction of the Qiblih. That involves a rather geographic interpretation that distracts from the metaphysical. If Bahá’u’lláh is aware of a possible unitarian interpretation, he isn’t letting us know about it. Here’s what he says about the intent of this verse in the Íqán:

In the eyes of God, the ideal King, all the places of the earth are one and the same, excepting that place which, in the days of His Manifestations, He doth appoint for a particular purpose.

From this, it is not at all evident that Bahá’u’lláh recognizes the verse as a profound statement about the divine nature of all things. At least, though, he does appear to recognize the literal interpretation of the word wajh in Questions and Answers, or does he? Is it possible that he simply interprets the verse to be saying “all places are the same”?

saheefah.org offers an interesting argument in favor of the literal interpretation of wajh.

Our Daily Bread: Changing Faces

by kaweah

Bahá’u’lláh’s letter to Mánikchí Ṣáḥib, as we considered recently, is a rather progressive composition, and one can easily detect signs that it was addressed to a Zoroastrian. Without going so far as to recite “good thought, good words, good deeds”, the letter discussed the triad of good thought, expression, and action that is so familiar to Zoroastrians, and exalted the place of wisdom to divinity as we’re told Zoroaster did three millennia ago. It did not touch upon the more obvious theme of fire, which Bahá’u’lláh did in a couple of letters to Zoroastrian Baháís, but gave passing reference to the theme of purity. Like Bahá’u’lláh’s letters to Zoroastrian Baháís, that letter omitted any mention of Muhammad, Islám, or the Qur’án.

Beside all that, the letter was just plain warm and affectionate:

Thy letter hath reached this captive of the world in His prison. It brought joy, strengthened the ties of friendship, and renewed the memory of bygone days. Praise be to the Lord of creation Who granted us the favour of meeting in the Arabian land, 1wherein we visited and held converse. It is Our hope that our encounter may never be forgotten nor effaced from the heart by the passage of time, but rather that, out of the seeds thus sown, the sweet herbs of friendship may spring forth and remain forever fresh and verdant for all to behold. (1.3)

Bahá’u’lláh’s letter to Mírzá Abu’l-Fadl, also in the volume Tabernacle of Unity, is conspicuously different, and of evident Islamic content and character.

Make sure the butter’s soft. Today we are nourished by several slices, beginning with this:

Once the validity of a divinely appointed Prophet hath been established, to none is given the right to ask why or wherefore. Rather is it incumbent upon all to accept and obey whatsoever He saith. (2.46)

This is a reponse to the basic question of reason vs. revelation: should we live according to reason, or according to the dictates of revelation? Whereas Bahá’u’lláh’s letter to Mánikchí Ṣáḥib seemed to take the former position, his letter to Mírzá Abu’l-Fadl takes the opposite position, as clearly and concisely as Bahá’u’lláh ever did. That is not to say that he didn’t make similar statements elsewhere, for he certainly did, in the Aqdas, Íqán, and in other places.

The reason given in the present letter is that men do not possess the rational capacity to go it alone:

It is nonetheless indisputably clear and evident that the minds of men have never been, nor shall they ever be, of equal capacity. The Perfect Intellect alone can provide true guidance and direction. (2.22)

Thus it must be that, according to Bahá’u’lláh, human reason is better fitted to understand the words of the prophets than what it might otherwise gather from life.

It is important to note, though, that excessive analysis of scripture can be a hazardous pastime. For, because of the great variance in intellectual capacity, scripture is conceived to be understood by feeble minds as well as Sen McGlinn. It isn’t a matter of reason or evidence; it’s a matter of obedience:

It is incumbent upon all to turn their gaze towards the Cause of God and to observe that which hath dawned above the horizon of His Will, since it is through the potency of His name that the banner of “He doeth what He willeth” hath been unfurled and the standard of “He ordaineth what He pleaseth” hath been raised aloft. For instance, were He to pronounce water itself to be unlawful, it would indeed become unlawful, and the converse holdeth equally true. (2.31)

And finally, we have a fourth slice that echoes the opening passage of the Kitáb-i-Aqdas:

The whole duty of man is to recognize Him; once this hath been achieved, then whatsoever He may please to ordain is binding and in full accordance with the requirements of divine wisdom. (2.24)

Sorry: that’s a lot of toast, and the slices aren’t thin. Don’t eat it all at once.

Perhaps the fact that the letter is addressed to a Muslim Baháí has a lot to do with Bahá’u’lláh’s striking change in tone and content in this letter. This leads me to pause and wonder, can the entire repertoire of Bahá’u’lláh be sliced cleanly into mutually distinct revelations, if the blade is sufficiently sharp and serrated?

Our Daily Bread: Flamin’ Metaphors

by kaweah

Two of the letters that Bahá’u’lláh wrote to Zoroastrian Bahá’ís touched upon the theme of fire, the primary symbol of Zoroastrianism. In one letter, he simply mentioned fire several times, along with several other Zoroastrian themes (light, deeds, charity, gardens, water, and purity). There’s a lot of key terms thrown in, but not much food for thought, IMHO. In the other letter, he goes into greater depth, so we have cut today’s slice from that letter:

O friends of God! Incline your inner ears to the voice of the peerless and self-subsisting Lord, that He may deliver you from the bonds of entanglement and the depths of darkness and enable you to attain the eternal light. Ascent and descent, stillness and motion, have come into being through the will of the Lord of all that hath been and shall be. The cause of ascent is lightness, and the cause of lightness is heat. Thus hath it been decreed by God. The cause of stillness is weight and density, which in turn are caused by coldness.

Though there are indications that fire is an important metaphor to Bahá’u’lláh as a source of light, the only explicit statement in this letter regarding the metaphorical value of fire regards it as a source of heat, motion, and presumably energy in general.

Bahá’u’lláh continues:

And since He hath ordained heat to be the source of motion and ascent and the cause of attainment to the desired goal, He hath therefore kindled with the mystic hand that Fire that dieth not and sent it forth into the world, that this divine Fire might, by the heat of the love of God, guide and attract all mankind to the abode of the incomparable Friend.

Bahá’u’lláh appears to be under the impression that these metaphors have not occurred to anyone before him:

This is the mystery enshrined in your Book that was sent down aforetime, a mystery which hath until now remained concealed from the eyes and hearts of men.

Note the phrasing “your Book,” which seems indicative of some degree of estrangement, or at least displacement, and lack of perfect camaraderie. This was not the only time that Bahá’u’lláh spoke of the Avesta as such. In fact, that’s the only way I’ve ever seen him refer to the Avesta. Did he ever refer to the Qur’án as “your Book?”. Bahá’u’lláh evidently regarded himself as a Muslim, but I digress.

I think it’s a safe bet that, had Bahá’u’lláh acquainted himself more with Zoroastrian scholarship, he may have been exposed to a number of other less obvious fire metaphors, such as those associated with purification, assessment of purity, transformation, transmutation, moral truth, and order. Not that he didn’t delve into such themes, he just didn’t appear to recognize their relationship to the fire that the Avesta calls “Asha”.

One of my favorite fire metaphors is the Logos image of Heraclitus, a Greek subject of the Persian Empire who was quite probably familiar with Zoroastrianism, as well as Armenian fire worship.

Our Daily Bread: Lord Wisdom

by kaweah

Zoroaster, that Iranian prophet of note, is recognized by Bahá’ís as one of the great “Manifestations of God”, and one of only three named non-Abrahamic so-called Manifestations. I say “named”, though I don’t know of any case where Bahá’u’lláh actually named any of them. I do know of a case where he mentioned Zoroastrians and Zoroaster, but only in quoting or paraphrasing questions set to him.

What is peculiar about the lack of any mention of Zoroaster by Bahá’u’lláh is that Bahá’u’lláh was a Persian, with some evident reason to concern himself with the ancient faith of his motherland, and did seem to concern himself with the conversion of Zoroastrians to the Baha’i Faith.

In 2006, various letters by Bahá’u’lláh to Zoroastrians and Bahá’ís of Zoroastrian origin were published under the title Tabernacle of Unity. Given the importance of Zoroastrianism to me, I intend to cut a number of slices from that volume. The first letter in that compilation—which I like to think as the superior Lawh-i-Hikmat—is the source and subject of todays’ slice:

The Tongue of Wisdom proclaimeth: He that hath Me not is bereft of all things. Turn ye away from all that is on earth and seek none else but Me. I am the Sun of Wisdom and the Ocean of Knowledge. I cheer the faint and revive the dead. I am the guiding Light that illumineth the way. I am the royal Falcon on the arm of the Almighty. I unfold the drooping wings of every broken bird and start it on its flight.

It may be of some importance to note that the name of the Zoroastrian God is “Wisdom” (Mazda), and that, given the Zoroastrian emphasis on freewill, intelligence, and conscience, this is no arbitrary coincidence. From an impartial standpoint, it is hard to know whether Bahá’u’lláh was aware of this fact, but he was Persian, after all, and the foremost scholar in his service, Mirza Abu’l-Fadl, was employed in the service of the Zoroastrian to whom this letter was addressed. If we read the paragraph in this light, we might interpret it as an exaltation of wisdom to the rank of God.

It so happens that we can determine the context of this passage from the second letter of the volume, where the question to which the passage replies is cited:

Some maintain that whatsoever is in accordance with the dictates of nature and of the intellect must needs be both permissible and compulsory in the divine law, and conversely that one should refrain from observing that which is incompatible with these standards. Others believe that whatsoever hath been enjoined by the divine law and its blessed Author should be accepted without rational proof or natural evidence and obeyed without question or reservation, … Kindly indicate which of these positions is acceptable.

Given what I’ve already indicated about the general character of Zoroastrian belief, its comparatively non-scriptural (liturgical) origins, and the fact that much of what it teaches is accompanied by justifications (however outdated, obscure, or absurd), it is reasonable to presume that the former position is the Zoroastrian position. The latter can be presumed to represent the Islamic position.

In light of this, it seems pertinent to observe that Bahá’u’lláh continues as follows (key phrase and Zoroastrian key words in bold):

The incomparable Friend saith: The path to freedom hath been outstretched; hasten ye thereunto. The wellspring of wisdom is overflowing; quaff ye therefrom. Say: O well-beloved ones! The tabernacle of unity hath been raised; regard ye not one another as strangers. Ye are the fruits of one tree, and the leaves of one branch. Verily I say, whatsoever leadeth to the decline of ignorance and the increase of knowledge hath been, and will ever remain, approved in the sight of the Lord of creation.

The Zoroastrian mantra, if there is any, is: good thoughts; good words; good deeds. Bahá’u’lláh elaborates, pointing out that acquired knowledge must be applied:

In this day the choicest fruit of the tree of knowledge is that which serveth the welfare of humanity and safeguardeth its interests.

He also says that words have no influence without the support of action:

O people! Words must be supported by deeds, for deeds are the true test of words. Without the former, the latter can never quench the thirst of the yearning soul, nor unlock the portals of vision before the eyes of the blind.

A little paradoxically, he asserts that words have great influence in and of themselves:

The Lord of celestial wisdom saith: A harsh word is even as a sword thrust; a gentle word as milk. The latter leadeth the children of men unto knowledge and conferreth upon them true distinction.

What does he say about “good thoughts”? Perhaps all this talk of wisdom covers that.

I do not believe that we can reasonably conclude that these statements express the fundamentals of Bahá’u’lláh’s religion. The picture, unfortunately, is far from that simple, but letters like this one are encouraging to the Western liberals and Zoroastrians-in-spirit among the Bahá’ís. That should come as no surprise, given that this letter was addressed to a Zoroastrian. Regrettably, the tone of Bahá’u’lláh’s follow-up letter is quite different.

To be continued …