For thousands of years, the spoken word has been the basis of religion. The ancient Jewish scriptures were memorised by generations of hereditary priests. Only part of the Torah was written down before the Babylonian conquest. The Qur’ān was primarily a chanted text, passed down orally from one generation to the next. Small fragments of the Qur’ān were written down on bones and leaves, but it was under the initiative of ‘Uthmān that the text was compiled in one volume. Nevertheless, the oral tradition continued and the various “readings” of the Qur’ān were passed from one ear to the next. The Vedas were also passed down orally. Now, we come to the Bábí and Bahá’í sacred writings. Were they also oral texts? Indeed they were. From the very first moment, the Báb chanted the Qayyúmu’l-Asmá’, even as He wrote it simultaneously with His pen. Later on, He had an amanuensis who would write down what the Báb uttered. Bahá’u’lláh did write by hand at the beginning of His ministry, but later relied on an amanuensis as well, especially after His half-brother, Mírzá Yahyá, attempted to murder Him with poison. The effects of Yahyá’s perfidy left Bahá’u’lláh with a shaky hand for the rest of His life (though He did use that hand to write His own Testament, the Kitábu ‘Ahdí).
The spoken word is primal. In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. Those are the words of John (1:1). The Logos is the Primal Will of God that has existed for all time. While the Essence of God is utterly remote and inaccessible, He brought forth the Primal Will as the Agent that brought creation into being and speaks to us through Manifestations. It is this Eternal Logos, the Word of God, uttered in the time before time, in the beginning that hath no beginning, the everlasting “Kun” (Be!) and it is. It is this Primal Will whose existence the philosophers have proved through rational arguments, while God Himself is above such arguments, residing in the highest Kingdom, above the reach of even the Manifestations of God themselves. While it is not a literal word in the same sense as our human words, we are mirrors of the divine Reality and through human speech we can mirror forth the divine speech of God Himself.
The spoken word is thus a shadow of the Divine process of speaking, the creative utterance that generates all things. Speech is creative, even in human society. It is the basis of human communication, law, education, spiritual teaching, and relationships. While animals can communicate in a basic way, human speech is a remarkable sign of the potency of our souls, which distinguish us from animals (though in earlier stages our animal-like forms had not yet acquired the capacity, just as the embryo in the womb is still in development). Bahá’u’lláh says: “Consider the rational faculty with which God hath endowed the essence of man. Examine thine own self, and behold how thy motion and stillness, thy will and purpose, thy sight and hearing, thy sense of smell and power of speech, and whatever else is related to, or transcendeth, thy physical senses or spiritual perceptions, all proceed from, and owe their existence to, this same faculty.” (Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 163) Speech, which is a manifestation of the uniquely human power of reason, is also the means by which we should spread the Faith of God and establish the new world civilization of Bahá’u’lláh. He writes: “We have ordained that complete victory should be achieved through speech and utterance, that Our servants throughout the earth may thereby become the recipients of divine good.” (Bahá’u’lláh, Tablets of Bahá'u'lláh Revealed after the Kitab-i-Aqdas, pp. 197-198)
While the spoken word can be as much a “smouldering fire” as it can be a fount of wisdom, I believe its importance cannot be underestimated. It is a duty of Bahá’ís, for instance, not merely to read the Writings to oneself, but to “recite” them out loud. Bahá’u’lláh says: “Recite ye the verses of God every morn and eventide. Whoso faileth to recite them hath not been faithful to the Covenant of God and His Testament, and whoso turneth away from these holy verses in this Day is of those who throughout eternity have turned away from God. Fear ye God, O My servants, one and all.” (Bahá’u’lláh, The Kitab-i-Aqdas: The Most Holy Book, v. 149, p. 73) It is also a duty of parents to teach their children to recite verses out loud in Bahá’í Houses of Worship: “Teach your children the verses revealed from the heaven of majesty and power, so that, in most melodious tones, they may recite the Tablets of the All-Merciful in the alcoves within the Mashriqu'l-Adhkárs” (The Kitab-i-Aqdas: The Most Holy Book, v. 150, p. 73)
I have been interested in making audio recordings for quite some time used to make recordings of some of my own stories on cassette tapes back when I lived in America. When I discovered LibriVox back in 2007, the first two books I decided to record were Dr. Esperanto’s International Language, a translation of Dr. Ludwik Zamenhof’s Unua Libro (First Book) on the international auxiliary language, Esperanto AND Isabella Brittingham’s The Revelation of Baha-ullah in a Sequence of Four Lessons. The latter was one of the earliest English books on the Faith and there was no standard way of spelling Bahá’u’lláh at the time (Baha’o’llah was also common because Iranians pronounce the Arabic short u like o). If you don’t know already, LibriVox is a wonderful project to record every book (yes every book) in the public domain. There are already countless thousands of scanned and transcribed books available at Gutenberg and the Internet Archive. However, reading books on a computer screen is tiresome and scrolling through pdf scans of 19th century works difficult. LibriVox volunteers bring these books to life by creating public domain recordings that anyone can download for free, copy, distribute and share—completely legally. There are already 3,000 books in the LibriVox catalogue, most of which are in English.
There are a few places where you can find free Bahá’í audiobooks. There are some available at the Bahá’í Audio Readings Repository, Bahá’í Study Centre (is this link not working now?) and Voices Divine . You can find Arabic recordings of the Most Holy Book here. There are also a few places where you can buy professional Bahá’í audiobooks, such as Hear the Writings.com and the Bahá’í Service for the Blind. Though not in audio format, Bahá’í eBooks Publications is also interesting. Nevertheless, the best place for Bahá’ís who want to create new audiobooks is LibriVox. LibriVox allows volunteers to set up projects to record any book they want, as long as it is public domain in the United States (published before 1923). There are many Bahá’í books which are public domain, including all the original Arabic and Persian writings of the Báb, Bahá’u’lláh and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. Shoghi Effendi’s writings are not yet in the public domain however. Nevertheless, there is great potential for Bahá’ís to get involved and record early English works as well as Persian and Arabic Bahá’í writings. Anyone who has a voice can get involved in LibriVox. You don’t have to be a technical whizz or a professional voice artist. Everyone is welcome and no one will judge you based on your reading style or accent. LibriVox needs more Bahá’ís and everyone can help either by recording or proof listening.
I have already recorded several Bahá’í works, which you can download and listen to:
We do need volunteers for A Year Amongst the Persians and I urge any Bahá’ís reading this to jump in straight away and record. You’ll enjoy the experience and learn a lot along the way. In conclusion, there is much to be done to advance the cause of Bahá’í Audio Books and your help is needed. We are a grassroots Faith and the creation of Bahá’í audio books can result from grassroots action. Let’s do this!
I never enjoy conflict. That is one thing that I can truly say. Conflict disturbs me. But what disturbs me even more are attacks on beliefs that I hold sacred. As a Bahá’í, I accept the authority of the Bahá’í scriptures. The writings of Bahá’u’lláh, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi are authoritative for believers in the Faith and explain many of the most difficult questions: good and evil, the nature of prophets and manifestations, predestination, life after death. Of course there are no complete explanations, because humanity is not perfect. We can only absorb so much at a time and comprehend the teachings to a certain level. Nevertheless, the existence of the voluminous writings aforementioned really removes a lot of the causes of conflict that exist in other religions. Is the Prophet God or man? A simple investigation of the Scriptures reveals the answer. Why do bad things happen to good people? The Scriptures again provide the answer. Bahá’í laws are also quite clear. If there is any reason for doubt, one can turn to institutions, such as the Universal House of Justice, which is infallible. So there really isn’t much room for conflict in the Faith. Conflicts do exist, however, quite often where a scholar or intellectual has a problem with one of the Bahá’í teachings. The issue of women on the House of Justice, for instance, is only a problem if one doesn’t accept the authority of Bahá’u’lláh who created the teaching in the first place. Most people in the world are not looking for doubt, but certainty, and any conflicts of this kind are very unhelpful. The Bahá’í teachings provide certainty and clear moral and spiritual guidance. I’m referring to this because of forums such as ----- and Planet Bahá’í where conflicts do often arise because people are unwilling to submit to the divine teachings.
Now, that is just a bit of an introduction. I am writing this post because of a recent blog post attacking me personally and attacking my beliefs. I am only writing this to defend myself and uphold my principles. Let me start with a point that troubles me in particular. On my Facebook profile, I have listed myself as a World Federalist, a monarchist and morally conservative. Anyone who has investigated the Bahá’í teachings will observe that the Bahá’í Faith cannot be classified as liberal or conservative, left-wing or right-wing. Shoghi Effendi writes: “There can and should be not liberal or conservatives, no moderates or extremes in the Cause. For they are all subject to the one and the same law which is the Law of God. This law transcends all differences, all personal or local tendencies, moods and aspirations.” (Compilations, Lights of Guidance, p. 79) There are many teachings which are socially progressive, BUT the Bahá’í teachings are very morally conservative. Prohibitions on sex before marriage, homosexual activities, abortion (except in life-threatening situations), etc. are very clearly laid down in Bahá’u’lláh’s writings. That the Faith is morally conservative has never been in doubt. In fact, Bahá’ís believe that the moral and spiritual element of religion never changes, and we can see in the Bahá’í moral teachings a clear connection to Islam, Christianity and Judaism.
Secondly—monarchism. According to Bahá’u’lláh, the best form of government is a constitutional monarchy. Bahá’u’lláh goes so far as to say that no country should be deprived of kingship. In the fifteenth Glad-Tidings, He says: “Although a republican form of government profiteth all the peoples of the world, yet the majesty of kingship is one of the signs of God. We do not wish that the countries of the world should remain deprived thereof. If the sagacious combine the two forms into one, great will be their reward in the presence of God.” (Baha'u'llah, Tablets of Baha'u'llah, p. 27) Shoghi Effendi, likewise, notes that the decline in monarchy worldwide is temporary. As more and more people embrace the Bahá’í teachings, people will realise the spiritual value of monarchy, which will increase. In one pilgrim’s note (not authoritative), but most likely an accurate record of what Shoghi Effendi said, he indicates that America itself will one day have a king:
“* Bahá'u'lláh does not wish the countries to be deprived of kingship, so when there are enough Baha'i states, they will follow the injunction of Baha'u'llah. Then he made the surprising statement that America will one day have a king.*” (*VISITING THE BAHA'I WORLD* *By Ruhaniyyih Ruth Moffet* * * *Notes of table conversation given by the beloved Guardian in the presence of Ruhiyyih Khanum and the members of the International Council who heard them all.*)
Here is an authoritative quote from the Guardian about the importance of the Bahá’í principle of monarchism:
“Let none, however, mistake or unwittingly misrepresent the purpose of Bahá'u'lláh. Severe as has been His condemnation pronounced against those sovereigns who persecuted Him, and however strict the censure expressed collectively against those who failed signally in their clear duty to investigate the truth of His Faith and to restrain the hand of the wrongdoer, His teachings embody no principle that can, in any way, be construed as a repudiation, or even a disparagement, however veiled, of the institution of kingship. The catastrophic fall, and the extinction of the dynasties and empires of those monarchs whose disastrous end He particularly prophesied, and the declining fortunes of the sovereigns of His Own generation, whom He generally reproved -- both constituting a passing phase of the evolution of the Faith -- should, in no wise, be confounded with the future position of that institution. Indeed if we delve into the writings of the Author of the Bahá'í Faith, we cannot fail to discover unnumbered passages in which, in terms that none can misrepresent, the principle of kingship is eulogized, the rank and conduct of just and fair-minded kings is extolled, the rise of monarchs, ruling with justice and even professing His Faith, is envisaged, and the solemn duty to arise and ensure the triumph of Bahá'í sovereigns is inculcated. To conclude from the above quoted words, addressed by Bahá'u'lláh to the monarchs of the earth, to infer from the recital of the woeful disasters that have overtaken so many of them, that His followers either advocate or anticipate the definite extinction of the institution of kingship, would indeed be tantamount to a distortion of His teaching.
“I can do no better than quote some of Bahá'u'lláh's Own testimonies, leaving the reader to shape his own judgment as to the falsity of such a deduction. In His "Epistle to the Son of the Wolf" He indicates the true source of kingship: "Regard for the rank of sovereigns is divinely ordained, as is clearly attested by the words of the Prophets of God and His chosen ones. He Who is the Spirit [Jesus] -- may peace be upon Him -- was asked: 'O Spirit of God! Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?' And He made reply: 'Yea, render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.' He forbade it not. These two sayings are, in the estimation of men of insight, one and the same, for if that which belonged to Caesar had not come from God He would have forbidden it. And likewise in the sacred verse: 'Obey God and obey the Apostle, and those among you invested with authority.' By 'those invested with authority' is meant primarily and more specially the Imams -- the blessings of God rest upon them. They verily are the manifestations of the power of God and the sources of His authority, and the repositories of His knowledge, and the daysprings of His commandments. Secondarily these words refer unto the kings and rulers -- those through the brightness of whose justice the horizons of the world are resplendent and luminous."
“And again: "In the Epistle to the Romans Saint Paul hath written: 'Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God; the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever, therefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God.' And further: 'For he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.' He saith that the appearance of the kings, and their majesty and power, are of God."
“And again: "A just king enjoyeth nearer access unto God than anyone. Unto this testifieth He Who speaketh in His Most Great Prison."
(Shoghi Effendi, The Promised Day is Come, pp. 71-72)
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, furthermore, upholds the principle of primogeniture, the succession of the eldest son, which is a clear and established Bahá’í principle: “In all the Divine Dispensations the eldest son hath been given extraordinary distinctions. Even the station of prophethood hath been his birthright.” (Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 186) Bahá’ís are, according to their very belief system, monarchists. The hereditary nature of the Guardianship, which is confined to males, is an essential part of our Faith, even though the Guardian himself had no son and successor. The hereditary principle is established, and the idea of primogeniture incontestable. That I should have to defend myself on this point is mind-boggling. The solution to this conflict is, as always, to deepen in the Writings. Shoghi Effendi says clearly that to advocate or anticipate “the definite extinction of the institution of kingship… would indeed be tantamount to a distortion of His teaching”. There is no doubt whatsoever, that kingship will definitely be an important part of the future World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, the Bahá’í World Commonwealth.
So far, have I been unjustified in calling myself morally conservative and a monarchist? Now, to address the issue of world federalism: I can’t even begin to think why I need to address this. The Bahá’í teachings hold that a world government will be established, and that this will be a federal government. In other words, nations will still exist and have their own powers and responsibilities, but there will also be a world parliament, executive and judiciary who have federal powers. The definition of this Bahá’í principle is “world federalism”. ALL Bahá’ís, and I repeat, ALL Bahá’ís are World Federalists. This is not the ultimate goal of the Faith, of course. The world federal government is part of the Lesser Peace, which will be replaced by the Bahá’í World Commonwealth with the commencement of the Greater Peace. Nevertheless, there is nothing archaic or antiquated about this. We are World Federalists. I am a World Federalist. Anyone who denies that the Bahá’í Faith upholds this principle is in denial of this basic principle.
Other Points of Clarification:
I have never accused the person in question of using the pronoun She for God because of political correctness or trinitarianism (a strange claim indeed). What does Trinitarianism have to do with pronouns referring to God? I simply mentioned that the Bahá’í Faith does not follow political correctness or feminism. The Bahá’í Writings use the pronoun He for God simply because the Arabic original also uses Huwa (He). One of the names of God in the Bahá’í Faith is Al-Huwa (The HE) (see Tablet of the Bell) and Huwa is probably one of the most common names of God in the Faith.
I have never argued that men are superior to women. I believe in the EQUALITY of men and women. At the same time, I don’t believe men and women are the same. It is Bahá’u’lláh, not I, who gives women and men a different amount of inheritance in cases of intestacy, it is Bahá’u’lláh who confined the membership of the Universal House of Justice to men, it is Bahá’u’lláh that stipulated that men are the default breadwinners of the family (the House of Justice accepts the designation of men as “head of the family” in this relation only), it is ‘Abdu’l-Bahá who confined the Guardianship to men. Men and women are different, and yes, it is probably this difference that gives women a different role. Men give dowry, women receive it. Men are fathers, women are mothers. Men are responsible for teaching their children the law of God. Girls have priority in education. I would never argue that men are superior to women. I am a Bahá’í, so why would I ever deny Bahá’í teachings??? I shape my beliefs based on the Bahá’í writings, not otherwise. I didn’t decide one day that I’d like to be a moral conservative or I happen to like monarchies so I will somehow fit that into the Teachings. No! I believe in those things BECAUSE I have read and studied the Bahá’í Writings. I believe men and women are equal, because I believe in the Writings. I believe men and women have different roles, because I have studied Bahá’í law. Are women incapable of being infallible (within the context of Prophethood, Guardianship or House membership)? Perhaps. Should we argue about? No. Because ‘Abdu’l-Bahá explained that the reason is now hidden and will be made evident in the future. Women and men are different physically and emotionally, and there may be something about our genders that we do not yet understand, that could (I say could) make women incapable of being any of the above. For some reason, it is acceptable to acknowledge that women can’t be Guardians or House members, but if, based on this, one argues that perhaps prophethood itself is confined to men, one is a fundamentalist? I do not have superior knowledge, but I have a right to my opinions, which are perfectly probable and in conformity with the Teachings.
I have been accused of being a fundamentalist, a literalist, with dangerous ideas, when I simply express beliefs that most Bahá’ís would recognise as being normal and quite acceptable. We cannot impose outside values on the Bahá’í teachings. We must base our ideas on the teachings themselves. Feminism, for instance, while in principle advocating the equality of men and women, is actually a misguided ideology that, in many cases, manufactures rights that women shouldn’t have. Abortion is not a right. Life is sacred. According the Bahá’í teachings, abortion is only justified when the mother herself is in danger. Feminism holds abortion to be justified as part of a woman’s reproductive rights. Somone might accuse me of being a fundamentalist for saying this, but this simply reflects the morally conservative nature of the Bahá’í Faith. My ideas on men and women are based solidly on the Bahá’í Writings and guidance from the Universal House of Justice. In many ways, one could say the Bahá’í Faith gives a real Middle Path for the world to follow. We recognise men and women as equal, but do acknowledge differences in role. We don’t support any belief that holds men superior to women but we don’t support the excesses of feminism and other man-made ideologies.
The individual in question has written: “At least I certainly wouldn’t want to participate in his version of a Baha’i community or live in his version of the future, nor would I want other people to believe his views are what Baha’is stand for.” I think the majority of Bahá’ís would certainly not agree with this conclusion. I want to live in a Bahá’í community that follows Bahá’í principles. I accept the authority of the Universal House of Justice. Any guidance they have regarding monarchy, men and women, etc. even if it contradicts my own ideas, I will accept it. That is what Bahá’ís do. We accept the authority of the Bahá’í Scriptures and the infallible guidance of the Universal House of Justice.
I have no interest in engaging in conversation with anyone who would resort to labelling me as a fundamentalist. This is something Shoghi Effendi condemns. What am I to do? Label another as a liberal? We are not supposed to be liberal or conservative, left-wing or right-wing. We are just Bahá’ís. We aren’t neo-Islamic, we aren’t fundamentalists, we aren’t wishy-washy either. We’re not chauvinists, we’re not feminists, we are not extreme capitalists, and we are not Marxists. We uphold monarchy, but accept the value of elected government. I have no “neo-Islamic ideological bent”. I am not spreading “manifest errors”. I am simply upholding the Bahá’í Teachings. My whole lifetime I have been a Bahá’í, my parents are Bahá’ís, I have met countless Bahá’ís. Those who would label me a fundamentalist are few and far between, and are clearly unjustified in doing so. I know what the Bahá’í Faith teaches and what ordinary Bahá’ís believe. There are a minority of Bahá’í scholars who attack these ordinary beliefs as “fundamentalist”. For some, anyone who upholds the absolute infallibility of the Universal House of Justice is a fundamentalist. I’m not accusing the individual of this, or anything at all actually. I’m simply pointing to an example. This false dichotomy of liberal and fundamentalist must be erased from the Bahá’í community as it has no justification and is condemned by Shoghi Effendi himself. All Bahá’ís have a common ground and common spiritual and moral principles, a common community and accept a common authority—the Writings and the Universal House of Justice. There is no reason why any differences of liberalism or conservativism should exist between us.
In conclusion, I urge all Bahá’ís—we should not be fighting each other. We should stick together and recognise our common values and the common authority which we rely on. Our main strength is unity, not fighting. The peoples of the world are yearning for sincerity and certainty, not confusion and mish-mashed ideas. The people of the world don’t want to embrace a religion where adherents argue over basic teachings. They want to see a religion where people stand up for what they believe in. We have Bahá’u’lláh’s Writings and this must be the basis in any disagreement. Our energies should be focused on those who attack the Faith. We cannot fight amongst ourselves and outside. We should stick together as Bahá’ís and defend the Faith from outside forces who are opposed to our beliefs and seek to misrepresent their character. As Bahá’ís, we must join together and turn our energies towards defending the Faith from external forces, as ‘Abdu’l-Bahá has said:
“The beloved of the Lord must stand fixed as the mountains, firm as impregnable walls. Unmoved must they remain by even the direst adversities, ungrieved by the worst of disasters. Let them cling to the hem of Almighty God, and put their faith in the Beauty of the Most High; let them lean on the unfailing help that cometh from the Ancient Kingdom, and depend on the care and protection of the generous Lord. Let them at all times refresh and restore themselves with the dews of heavenly grace, and with the breaths of the Holy Spirit revive and renew themselves from moment to moment. Let them rise up to serve their Lord, and do all in their power to scatter His breathings of holiness far and wide. Let them be a mighty fortress to defend His Faith, an impregnable citadel for the hosts of the Ancient Beauty. Let them faithfully guard the edifice of the Cause of God from every side; let them become the bright stars of His luminous skies. For the hordes of darkness are assailing this Cause from every direction, and the peoples of the earth are intent on extinguishing this evident Light. And since all the kindreds of the world are mounting their attack, how can our attention be diverted, even for a moment? Assuredly be cognizant of these things, be watchful, and guard the Cause of God.” (‘Abdu'l-Bahá, Selections from the Writings of ‘Abdu'l-Bahá, pp. 9-10)
I will end with this lovely quote from ‘Abdu’l-Bahá:
“As to you: your efforts must be lofty. Exert yourselves with heart and soul so that through your efforts the light of universal peace may shine; that all men may become as one family; that the East may assist the West and the West give help to the East. Consider how the Prophets who have been sent, the great souls who have appeared and the sages who have arisen among men, have exhorted mankind to unity and love. This has been the goal of their guidance and message.” (Portals to Freedom, pp. 214-215)
Anyone who has read "Some Answered Questions" by 'Abdu'l-Bahá will be aware that the Bahá'í position on evolution and the origin of man is a unique one. While the harmony of science and religion is emphasised in the Bahá'í Faith as a basic principle, it must also be recognised that human knowledge is limited and scientific theories often erroneous. Science does not refer to natural science alone, but includes all areas of knowledge about reality. Thus harmony must exist between this knowledge and religion is not a statement that religion must "conform" to science. In other words, if we find something in religion which contradicts scientific theories, we are not obliged to reject the religious principle. On the contrary, where divine revelation does reveal information about the physical universe, we are obliged to recognise the limitations of human knowledge and accept the divinely revealed principle. This superiority of divine knowledge to human knowledge is an important concept. 'Abdu'l-Bahá was possessed of superhuman knowledge that was not limited to religious concepts, but also included knowledge of the physical world.
As many Bahá'ís have correctly recognised, 'Abdu'l-Bahá teaches that current evolutionary theory is flawed. There is no "missing link" between man and the primates. [The recently discovered "missing link" is not really such. It is an ancestor or relative or modern apes or humans but cannot be related to both from a Bahá'í perspective. Recent scientific studies have shown that Ida is not the ancestor humankind and hence, not the missing link between men and the animal world]. Rather, human beings and animals exist on different spiritual levels of reality and cannot be physically related. 'Abdu'l-Bahá writes:
"The lost link of Darwinian theory is itself a proof that man is not an animal. How is it possible to have all the links present and that important link absent? Its absence is an indication that man has never been an animal. It will never be found." (Promulgation of Universal Peace, pp. 358-359)
This does not mean that 'Abdu'l-Bahá denies evolution. On the contrary, 'Abdu'l-Bahá appears to uphold the concept that humans have evolved, but not from other species. Throughout our entire evolution, from its very beginning, we have been separate from animals. From a spiritual perspective, it is easy to see why any relationship between animals and human beings would be impossible. Human beings, even in an embryonic stage, with no reason, intelligence or even a brain, yet have a human soul. The immortal soul, Bahá'ís believe, begins its relationship with the body at the moment of conception. Shoghi Effendi writes: "The soul or spirit of the individual comes into being with the conception of his physical body." (Compilations, Lights of Guidance, p. 504) This is a solid Bahá'í principle. It must follow that "ensoulment" has no relationship with rationality. This concept of conception as the moment when the soul and body begin their relationship is also the basis for the Bahá'í prohibition on abortion.
It cannot be said that human beings evolved, and at a certain point in time were wise enough or rational enough to receive a soul. How would that work anyway? Two pre-human animals who are almost intelligent mate and conceive a child that is destined to be "just rational enough" to get a soul? So at that moment, this first pre-human receives a soul? Who does this pre-human then mate with, another soulless cousin or is his wife also miraculously conceived with a soul? His poor parents were doomed for destruction, however, as they were only almost rational and not rational enough for ensoulment. The reality is that Bahá'ís teach that human beings, in whatever form in their ancient ancestry, were human and had souls. This is no different from acknowledging that humans can have souls at the moment of conception, even though they are not possessed of reason. Human beings evolved separately and distinctly from animals. This is referred to as the concept of PARALLEL EVOLUTION, that is mentioned by Bahman Nadimi.
The ultimate origin of humankind is not known, but then again the origin of life is not known by scientists. Life may have originated on earth, or it may have originated elsewhere, in deep space. Bahá'u'lláh stated that every star has planets and every planets life. He wrote: "Know thou that every fixed star hath its own planets, and every planet its own creatures, whose number no man can compute." (Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, LXXXII. p. 162) If life is as widespread as Bahá'ís believe, then there is no problem acknowledging that life could have come from anywhere in the universe. Thus the antiquity of life is unknown. It may well have originated here on earth, or not. Science cannot give us any definitive answer. For all we know, animal and vegetable life could have its origins on earth and human life could originate from other parts of the universe. All that we know right now is that life, as it is observed, originates from other life. Abiogenesis is a possible model, but we cannot be certain of when or how abiogenesis first occurred. Perhaps life emerged once in the current physical universe that we know and has spread or been seeded since that time. It may be that human life emerged (possibly from abiogenesis) at one time, either on earth or elsewhere, and that animal life emerged at another time. None of this is impossible.
Human beings resemble primates. That is certain. But this must be considered in light of the Bahá'í concept of different levels of the spirit. The animal spirit contains all the powers of the vegetable spirit (life, growth, etc.) but also has other powers. Even within the vegetable and animal worlds, there are higher and lower levels. In the lowest levels of the vegetable kingdom, we find viruses and germs and single-celled organisms. At the highest level we find plants that are highly developed. In the animal kingdom we find worms and other simple creatures, and we find chimpanzees, gorillas and other primates. It is natural that the highest levels of the animal kingdom should be closest to the human kingdom as the human kingdom represents the highest level of the spirit underneath that of the Spirit of Faith and the Holy Spirit. But the gap is huge and unbreachable. Primates may be very similar to us physically, but they do not possess the qualities of the human spirit. This argument cannot be used to attack the idea of human beings once having animal like bodies. We were still in "development" as a species. But properly grown and developed, humans are entirely distinct from animals. Thus, even genetic similarities and similarities in embryology and bone structure, cannot prove that humans and primates are related. We are similar by view of hierarchy within kingdoms. Primates are the top of their kingdom. We are in our own kingdom. For those who wish to quote 'Abdu'l-Bahá's statement that the origin of life is one, they should bear in mind that, indeed, God is the origin of all life. But humans are not related to animals.
I really dislike books such as "Evolution and Baha'i Belief", edited by Kevin Brown. In this work, it is argued that 'Abdu'l-Bahá's remarks on evolution have been widely misunderstand. The Wikipedia page on the Bahá'í Faith and science resolutely confirms this position. In reality, however, this is an attempt by people in this era to explain away teachings that will, in the future, be vindicated by science. Bahá'ís have much more to gain by sticking with teachings that they know to be true, and WILL eventually be proven true by science, than by reintrepreting our teachings to conform to the erroneous theories of current scientists. 'Abdu'l-Bahá relates the fact that Muslim scholars used to be embarrassed by statements in the Qur'án that indicated that the earth revolved around the sun rather than vice versa. This contradicted science (in that era). So Muslims tried to explain it away. Later on, it was proved that the Qur'ánic position was correct. He writes:
“Thus, you know that before the observations of modern times – that is to say, during the first centuries and down to the fifteenth century of the Christian era – all the mathematicians of the world agreed that the earth was the center of the universe, and that the sun moved. The famous astronomer who was the protagonist of the new theory discovered the movement of the earth and the immobility of the sun. Until his time all the astronomers and philosophers of the world followed the Ptolemaic system, and whoever said anything against it was considered ignorant. Though Pythagoras, and Plato during the latter part of his life, adopted the theory that the annual movement of the sun around the zodiac does not proceed from the sun, but rather from the movement of the earth around the sun, this theory had been entirely forgotten, and the Ptolemaic system was accepted by all mathematicians. But there are some verses revealed in the Qur'án contrary to the theory of the Ptolemaic system. One of them is "The sun moves in a fixed place," which shows the fixity of the sun, and its movement around an axis.[Cf. Qur'án 36:37] Again, in another verse, "And each star moves in its own heaven."[ Cf. Qur'án 36:38] Thus is explained the movement of the sun, of the moon, of the earth, and of other bodies. When the Qur'án appeared, all the mathematicians ridiculed these statements and attributed the theory to ignorance. Even the doctors of Islam, when they saw that these verses were contrary to the accepted Ptolemaic system, were obliged to explain them away.
“It was not until after the fifteenth century of the Christian era, nearly nine hundred years after Muhammad, that a famous astronomer made new observations and important discoveries by the aid of the telescope, which he had invented. The rotation of the earth, the fixity of the sun, and also its movement around an axis, were discovered. It became evident that the verses of the Qur'án agreed with existing facts, and that the Ptolemaic system was imaginary.”
The same will be the case with Bahá'í teachings that contradict current scientific knowledge, e.g. that humans are not related to animals and evolved along parallel paths to animals, that copper can transmute into gold, that all planets have life-forms (currently unconfirmed with regards to Mars), that homosexuality is curable, etc. Other Bahá'í teachings have already been confirmed, Bahá'u'lláh's mysterious reference to a weapon like lightning (e.g. atomic weapons) and the existence of things in the earth which can pollute the atmosphere, Shoghi Effendi's reference to the internet in the 1930's, etc. etc. One could also add Bahá'u'lláh's prophecies and the way in which history is gradually moving in the direction of the Bahá'í teachings (see Century of Light).
Here are some authentic quotes from 'Abdu'l-Bahá on evolution:
“We have now come to the question of the modification of species and of organic development—that is to say, to the point of inquiring whether man’s descent is from the animal.
“This theory has found credence in the minds of some European philosophers, and it is now very difficult to make its falseness understood, but in the future it will become evident and clear, and the European philosophers will themselves realize its untruth. For, verily, it is an evident error. When man looks at the beings with a penetrating regard, and attentively examines the condition of existences, and when he sees the state, the organization and the perfection of the world, he will be convinced that in the possible world there is nothing more wonderful than that which already exists. For all existing beings, terrestrial and celestial, as well as this limitless space and all that is in it, have been created and organized, composed, arranged and perfected as they ought to be; the universe has no imperfection, so that if all beings became pure intelligence and reflected for ever and ever, it is impossible that they could imagine anything better than that which exists.”
“Let us return to our subject that man, in the beginning of his existence and in the womb of the earth, like the embryo in the womb of the mother, gradually grew and developed, and passed from one form to another, from one shape to another, until he appeared with this beauty and perfection, this force and this power. It is certain that in the beginning he had not this loveliness and grace and elegance, and that he only by degrees attained this shape, this form, this beauty and this grace. There is no doubt that the human embryo did not at once appear in this form; neither did it then become the manifestation of the words “Blessed, therefore, be God, the most excellent of Makers.” Gradually it passed through various conditions and different shapes, until it attained this form and beauty, this perfection, grace and loveliness. Thus it is evident and confirmed that the development and growth of man on this earth, until he reached his present perfection, resembled the growth and development of the embryo in the womb of the mother: by degrees it passed from condition to condition, from form to form, from one shape to another, for this is according to the requirement of the universal system and Divine Law.
“That is to say, the embryo passes through different states and traverses numerous degrees, until it reaches the form in which it manifests the words “Praise be to God, the best of Creators,” and until the signs of reason and maturity appear. And in the same way, man’s existence on this earth, from the beginning until it reaches this state, form and condition, necessarily lasts a long time, and goes through many degrees until it reaches this condition. But from the beginning of man’s existence he is a distinct species. In the same way, the embryo of man in the womb of the mother was at first in a strange form; then this body passes from shape to shape, from state to state, from form to form, until it appears in utmost beauty and perfection. But even when in the womb of the mother and in this strange form, entirely different from his present form and figure, he is the embryo of the superior species, and not of the animal; his species and essence undergo no change. Now, admitting that the traces of organs which have disappeared actually exist, this is not a proof of the impermanence and the nonoriginality of the species. At the most it proves that the form, and fashion, and the organs of man have progressed. Man was always a distinct species, a man, not an animal. So, if the embryo of man in the womb of the mother passes from one form to another so that the second form in no way resembles the first, is this a proof that the species has changed? that it was at first an animal, and that its organs progressed and developed until it became a man? No, indeed! How puerile and unfounded is this idea and this thought! For the proof of the originality of the human species, and of the permanency of the nature of man, is clear and evident.”
“To recapitulate: as man in the womb of the mother passes from form to form, from shape to shape, changes and develops, and is still the human species from the beginning of the embryonic period—in the same way man, from the beginning of his existence in the matrix of the world, is also a distinct species—that is, man—and has gradually evolved from one form to another. Therefore, this change of appearance, this evolution of members, this development and growth, even though we admit the reality of growth and progress, does not prevent the species from being original. Man from the beginning was in this perfect form and composition, and possessed capacity and aptitude for acquiring material and spiritual perfections, and was the manifestation of these words, “We will make man in Our image and likeness.” He has only become more pleasing, more beautiful and more graceful. Civilization has brought him out of his wild state, just as the wild fruits which are cultivated by a gardener become finer, sweeter and acquire more freshness and delicacy.”
Have you ever listened to a LibriVox recording? If not, you may be surprised by the number of free audiobooks that are available. As of today, there are 3,197 completed audiobooks, all of them free to download and all of them in the public domain.
From the LibriVox page:
"For four-and-a-half years, LibriVox volunteers have been making audiobooks for the world to enjoy, and giving them away for free. We’ve made thousands of free audiobooks that have been downloaded by millions of people; our site gets 400,000 visitors every month. To date, all our costs have been borne by a few individuals, with some generous donations from partners. However, these costs have become too big.
"Our fundraising goal is $20,000. After we reach it, we’ll shut down our fundraising campaign. And we hope we can make it another 4.5 years without having to bother you again!"
Welcome to my blog! My name is Nicholas, and I'm a Bahá'í (i.e. someone who believes in Bahá'u'lláh, the Manifestation of God for this day and age and Promised One of all ages). I'm English by birth (i.e. I was born in England, and both English and American by ancestry (my mother is American). My direct, patrilinear ancestry is British, as I come from the R1b y-chromosomal haplotype that has inhabited the British Isles for over 10,000 years. I am also a vegetarian and an Esperantist (yes, I speak Esperanto and it is a living, thriving international auxiliary language created by Dr. Zamenhof in the 19th century). I'm currently a postgraduate student of linguistics at SOAS in London. My undegraduate degree in Middle Eastern Languages was completed at the University of Manchester.
My wife is Kenyan, of Luo and Kikuyu ancestry. She speaks Swahili, Dholuo and Kikuyu as her native languages, as well as English.
I regularly contribute to LibriVox, the largest free provider of public domain audiobooks in the world. For more information, or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org You can see a list of my contributions here.
, p. 163) Speech, which is a manifestation of the uniquely human power of reason, is also the means by which we should spread the Faith of God and establish the new world civilization of Bahá’u’lláh. He writes: “We have ordained that complete victory should be achieved through speech and utterance, that Our servants throughout the earth may thereby become the recipients of divine good.” (Bahá’u’lláh, Tablets of Bahá'u'lláh Revealed after the Kitab-i-Aqdas
, pp. 197-198)
, v. 149, p. 73) It is also a duty of parents to teach their children to recite verses out loud in Bahá’í Houses of Worship: “Teach your children the verses revealed from the
