From: rick@helix.nih.gov (Rick Troxel)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Subject: Human Evolution (was: Genesis)
Date: 2 Sep 92 16:06:11 GMT
Organization: <none>

In <1992Aug21.081555.11132@qiclab.scn.rain.com>,
gruber@abraham.usask.ca (Christian Gruber) writes:

> I believe it's in "The Promulgation of Universal Peace" - a
> selection of talks given by Abdu'l-Baha in America, that Abdu'l-Baha
> explains the creation of Mankind.  In his explanation, which is
> evolutionary of sorts, though it does not follow the traditional
> darwin model, he speaks of the form of man evolving over a great
> amount of time, so that at one point in its history, humanity must
> have appeared in the form of many animals which are existant today.
> He goes on, however, to establish that they were mankind always,
> though they had the form of others, as they posessed the rational
> soul, though embryonic.

> (And another bahai with a library close by can hopefully add the
> appropriate quotes on the subject for me.)

I'll try, as I find 'Abdul-Baha's ideas most interesting!  The talk
referenced above was delivered at an open forum, San Francisco, 10
October 1912.  The following excerpts are from pp. 358-359 of The
Promulgation of Universal Peace:

  Briefly, the evidences of intellect or reason are manifest in man.
  By them he is differentiated from the animal.  Therefore, the animal
  kingdom is distinct and inferior to the human kingdom.
  Notwithstanding this, the philosophers of the West have certain
  syllogisms, or demonstrations, whereby they endeavor to prove that
  man had his origin in the animal kingdom; that although he is now a
  vertebrate, he originally lived in the sea; from thence he was
  transferred to the land and became vertebrate; that gradually his
  feet and hands appeared in his anatomical development; then he began
  to walk upon all fours, after which he attained to human stature,
  walking erect.  They find that his anatomy has undergone successive
  changes, finally assuming human form, and that these intermediate
  forms or changes are like links connected....

  It is claimed man had a certain appendage which shows that there was
  a time when his anatomical structure was different from his present
  organism and that there has been a corresponding transformation or
  change in that structure.  The coccyx, or extremity of the human
  spinal column, is declared to be the vestige of a tail which man
  formerly possessed but which gradually disappeared when he walked
  erect and its utility ceased.  These statements and demonstrations
  express the substance of western philosophy upon the question of
  human evolution.

  The philosophers of the Orient in reply to those of the western
  world say: Let us suppose that the human anatomy was primordially
  different from its present form, that it was gradually transformed
  from one stage to another until it attained its present likeness,
  that at one time it was similar to a fish, later an invertebrate and
  finally human.  This anatomical evolution or progression does not
  alter or affect the statement that the development of man was always
  human in type and biological in progression.  For the human embryo
  when examined microscopically is at first a mere germ or worm.
  Gradually as it develops it shows certain divisions; rudiments of
  hands and feet appear -- that is to say, an upper and a lower part
  are distinguishable.  Afterward it undergoes certain distinct
  changes until it reaches its actual human form and is born into this
  world.  But at all times, even when the embryo resembled a worm, it
  was human in potentiality and character, not animal.  The forms
  assumed by the human embryo in its successive changes do not prove
  that it is animal in its essential character.  Throughout this
  progression there has been a transference of type, a conservation of
  species or kind.  Realizing this we may acknowledge the fact that at
  one time man was an inmate of the sea, at another period an
  invertebrate, then a vertebrate and finally a human being standing
  erect.  Though we admit these changes, we cannot say man is an
  animal.  In each one of these stages are signs and evidences of his
  human existence and destination.  Proof of this lies in the fact
  that in the embryo man still resembles a worm.  The embryo still
  progresses from one state to another, assuming different forms until
  that which was potential in it -- namely, the human image --
  appears.  Therefore, in the protoplasm, man is man.

  ... The significance is this: that the world of humanity is distinct
  from the animal kingdom.

Two more arguments are offered in support of this thesis; then
'Abdu'l-Baha ends with a joke that I can't resist including:

  Notwithstanding this, some of the sagacious men declare: We have
  attained to the superlative degree of knowledge; we have penetrated
  the laboratory of nature, studying sciences and arts; we have
  attained the highest station of knowledge in the human world; we
  have investigated the facts as they are and have arrived at the
  conclusion that nothing is rightly acceptable except the tangible,
  which alone is a reality worthy of credence; all that is not
  tangible is imagination and nonsense.

  Strange indeed that after twenty years training in colleges and
  universities man should reach such a station wherein he will deny
  the existence of the ideal or that which is not perceptible to the
  senses.  Have you ever stopped to think that the animal already has
  graduated from such a university?  Have you ever realized that the
  cow is already a professor emeritus of that university?  For the cow
  without hard labor and study is already a philosopher of the
  superlative degree in the school of nature.  The cow denies
  everything that is not tangible, saying, "I can see!  I can eat!
  Therefore, I believe only in that which is tangible!"

  Then why should we go to the colleges?  Let us go to the cow.
--
Rick Troxel						troxel@helix.nih.gov
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai