From: Steven.Kolins@lambada.oit.unc.edu
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Subject: Re: Manifestations
Date: 5 Oct 92 14:19:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.43921
Organization: -


Sorry this has taken a while - the matter of being specific about
Manifestations is touchy, and citations are better than memories.

In article <1992Sep2.040059.30060@m.cs.uiuc.edu> Ian Chai wrote:

>>Hi. I'm told that Baha'is believe that all religions are true and
>>just different dispensations from God -- that Gilgamesh, Abraham,
>>Confucius, Lao Tze, Moses, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammed, and finally
>>Baha'u'llah are all true prophets of God and that their teachings
>>were true teachings for their time.
>>
>>Is this true?

In article <TOWFIQ.92Sep23224649@justice.UUCP> answered briefly:

>The simple answer to the question is yes...  This is a fundamental
>belief of the Baha'i Faith.  However, let me go over the specific
>individuals mentioned.  Baha'u'llah (the Prophet-Founder of the
>Baha'i Faith) described Founders of the great world religions as
>"Manifestations of God".
>
>Of the individuals you listed, Baha'u'llah said the following were
>Manifestations of God:
>        Abraham, Moses, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammed, Baha'u'llah
>
>Others which should be included in your list are:
>        Adam, the Bab (the forerunner of Baha'u'llah), and Krishna
>
>Therefore, there is no such thing as a "complete" list of
>Manifestations of God.
>
>My own understanding is unclear about the status that the the Baha'i
>Writings gives to Confucius, Lao Tze, and Noah.  (The are mentioned
>in passing from time to time in the Baha'i Writings, but don't seem
>to be as central as the above named figures... Could other Baha'is
>help me out here?)  As for Gilgamesh, I'm pretty sure that
>Baha'u'llah did not describe him as a Manifestation of God.

This provides the opening to a range of questions - Manifestations
(and classes and missions of Manifestations), religions, Holy Books,
and religious traditions to name a few off the top of my head.  Note
that the terms Prophet, Messenger, Manifestation, (and many others)
are generally refering to the same thing.

[While some instances of "Prophet" seem equivalent to the other terms,
I do not know of a reference supporting this as a definition.  For
instance, I believe there are two essentially different words
translated as "prophet" in the Qur'an. The author's terminology should
be kept in mind while interpreting subsequent remarks. --rdt]

Here's my understanding - Noah is a full Manifestation of God. (Book
of Certitude/Kitab-i-Iqan p.7. "Among the Prophets was Noah.") Lao Tzu
is not mentioned by any of the Holy Writings of the Baha'i Faith.
Confucius is honored as a noble philosopher (Lights of Guidance p.501,
as are Socrates and some others - see Tablets of Wisdom/
Lawh-i-Hikmat.) Gilgamesh is not mentioned in the Holy Writings of the
Baha'i Faith.  Joseph Smith of the Mormon Church is not mentioned in
the Holy Writings of the Baha'i Faith.

The Guardian of the Baha'i Faith has mentioned that Lao Tzu is not
considered a prophet (Lights of Guidance, p. 502).  Joseph Smith is
described as "a religious teacher sensitive to the spiritual currents
flowing in the early 19th century" (Lights of Guidance, p.511.)  In
this connection also "We cannot add names of people we (or anyone
else) think might be Lesser Prophets to those found in the Qur'an, the
Bible and our own Scriptures."  (Lights of Guidance p. 503.)

It would seem to me that because of the magnetude of the station of a
Manifestation no one is officially considered a Manifestation other
than those mentioned by Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l-Baha, or explicitly in
the Quran, or Bible.

Baha'u'llah confirms that all Manifestations are of the same essence
though they have missions of varying importance.(Kitab-i-Iqan p. 176
for example.) And also there is an understanding of two stations of
Manifestations : "...independent prophets who are followed; the other
kind are not independent, and are themselves followers." Baha'i
Revelation (NOT the Revelation of Baha'u'llah,) p. 246-7.  Beyond
these specific missions of Manifestations, They exemplify special
attributes They are assigned to reveal - Christ also had the
particular station of Son of God, and Abraham is often called the
Friend of God in Baha'i Writings.  So there are other ways of
distinguishing the missions of Manifestations.  Indeed some Books
revealed by Manifestations can be destinguished as well - David
revealed a set of Prayers (I'm thinking of Psalms,) while Moses
revealed a set of Laws, (the Ten Commandments.)

As to the matter of Books...Baha'u'llah and the Bab are the only
Manifestations that personally authored or approved completed
renditions of Their words.  Apparently Mohammed approved the recording
of the words He revealed, but the Qur'an was compiled by Ali after the
passing of Muhammed.  The Bible is considered inspired and Holy, but
recorded after the death of the Manifestation (as per current
scientific evidense.) The Torah and related works likewise.  The Books
of Hinduism and Buddhism came into existence long after the Founding
Manifestations walked the earth, (for example "We cannot be sure of
the authenticity of the scriptures of Buddha and Krishna."  Shoghi
Effendi, in Lights of Guidance, p. 503)

After the central importance of the Manifestations, and the elemental
importance of Their Works, one turns to the world of human endevour -
areas frought with difficulties and differences, things that often
appear in incredible force follwing the passing of the Manifestation.
In this area we approach the matter of religious tradition: how the
followers impliment the Books and what experiences are added to the
interpritation and application of the Writings.  Where exactly is the
line between something divinely revealed, and something someone
remembers or thinks was ment by the Manifestation?  As the religions
get older and older they acreate more and more human commentary. The
Baha'i Faith keeps all statements "heard" by individuals not otherwise
confirmed in the category of "Pilgim Notes" not to be taken at face
value, but containing something of the meaning, (Lights of Guidance,
p.438) beyond this we will have to see how history works itself out.
Islam has the Hadith - quotes of Imams verifying statements of
Mohammed not in the Qur'an, quotes of Imams and other less
authenticated things of lesser value. Christianity raised up a Church
and all its forms and rights with only the few lines concerning Peter
as the official justification.  Judaism's Books have a great deal of
commentary by individual scholars destributed with the reports of the
words of the Manifestation - the whole of which is considered
indestinguishably holy (as far as i know.) Hinduism has many Books - I
beleive different denominations &/or sects honor the same Books to
different amounts - some of which were commentaries(the Upanishads),
some original works (the Vedas [ancient] and the Baghavad Gita
[relatively young?].) The Sabaean Faith seems even more remote.

thanks
Steven