collection: Biography
http://bahai-library.com/index.php
-
Ethel Rosenberg: The Life and Times of England's Outstanding Pioneering Worker, by Robert Weinberg: Review, in Baha'i Studies Review. Richard Hollinger. , 6. [more]
-
Account of the Death of Mirza Yahya Subh-i-Azal, in Materials for the Study of the Babi Religion. Alili Ridvan. E.G. Browne, trans. . [more]
-
Achievements and Victories of the Guardianship. Owen Battrick, comp. Achievements of the Guardian: list of books written, assemblies founded, Hands of the Cause appointed, and Plans for Expansion conceived. [more]
-
Lawh-i-Ahmad. Ahmad the recipient of the Arabic Tablet of Ahmad. Richard Francis. "Lawh-i-Ahmad". [more]
-
Alain Locke: Baha’i Philosopher, in Baha’i Studies Review. Christopher Buck. , 10 (2001/2002), page 7–49 (London: Association for Baha'i Studies English-Speaking Europe, 2001). [more]
-
Amoz Everett Gibson the First Black Member of the Universal House of Justice. Richard Francis. [more]
-
Arriving in Canada (1957 -59), in Jack Boyd Memoirs. Jack Boyd. Jack and Eileen's adventures as new arrivals in Canada (mostly Toronto) [more]
-
Arther Pillsbury Dodge the First President of the New York Baha'i Community. Richard Francis. [more]
-
Bahá'u'lláh, A Brief Life: The Word Made Flesh. Hasan M. Balyuzi. (London: George Ronald, 1963)Two long essays on the life of Baha'u'llah, published in conjunction with the Baha'i Centennial (1963). [more]
-
Bahiyyih Khanum: The Greatest Holy Leaf. Baha'i World Center. (Haifa: Bahá'í World Centre, 1982) . [more]
-
Barbara Sims' Contribution to Baha'i Scholarship in Asia Pacific, in ABS-Japan Newsletter. Sandra Fotos. , Vol. 12:2, pages 4-6. Memorial article re: Barbara Sims, Pioneer to Japan from 1953-2002 [more]
-
Biography of Hippolyte Dreyfus-Barney, in The Baha'i World. Laura C. Dreyfus-Barney and Shoghi Effendi. . A biography of the first French Baha'i, followed by telegrams and letters from Shoghi Effendi to Laura on Hippolyte's death. [more]
-
Claiming legitimacy: Prophecy narratives from northern aboriginal women, in The American Indian Quarterly. Julie Cruikshank. (University of Nebraska Press, 1994-03-22). Includes a discussion of Angela Sidney, a Tagish elder who was very active in the Baha'i Faith, and who believed that there is not necessary any conflict between Anglicanism, Baha'i, and indigenous shamanism. [more]
-
Conqueror of Hearts: Excerpts from Letters, Talks, and Writings of Hand of the Cause of God Abu'l-Qásim Faizí. Abu'l-Qasim Faizi. Shirley Macias, ed. [more]
-
Database of Bahá'í scholars, researchers, students: a catalogue of those with active Baha'i-related scholarly pursuits or academic training. An informal list of who's interested in what. Programmed by Alexis Megas and Stephen Fuqua [more]
-
Dawn-Breakers: Nabil's Narrative of the Early Days of the Baha'i Revelation. Nabil-i-A'zam. Shoghi Effendi, trans. [more]
-
Dr. Cormick's Accounts of his Personal Impressions of Mirza 'Ali Muhammad, The Báb, in Materials for the Study of the Babi Religion. Dr. Cormick. E.G. Browne, comp. . [more]
-
Eight Weeks Before the Mast, in Jack Boyd Memoirs. Jack Boyd. Jack worked on the crew of an oil tanker in 1957 [more]
-
Emergence Of A Baha'i Consciousness In World Literature: The Poetry of Roger White. Ron Price. Begun in the last years of Roger White's life, this book had an initial approval by White who read the first draft before he passed away in 1993. The book is essentially a study of White's verse with a short biography and an analysis of the Baha'i Faith. [more]
-
Lawh-i-Ibn-i-Dhib. Epistle to the Son of the Wolf: Biography of Siyyid Ismail of Zavarih. Iraj Ayman. "Lawh-i-Ibn-i-Dhib". [more]
-
Freya Stark: Letters: Volume 1: The Furnace and the Cup 1914-1930. Freya Stark. , pages 206-21Lucy Moorehead, ed. (Great Britain: Compton Russell Ltd., 1974). Letters about a stay in Baghdad in 1929, with a few passing references to Baha'is she met. [more]
-
Genealogy of Shoghi Effendi. Grover Gonzales. A hand-drawn chart of Shoghi Effendi's family history. [more]
-
Historical Account of two Indian Babis: Sa'en Hindi and Sayyid Basir Hindi. Sepehr Manuchehri. [more]
-
In memoriam Barbara Sims, in Baha'i News of Japan. Universal House of Justice, Sheridan Sims, and Sandra Sims Fotos. , No. 299, pages 2-3. [more]
-
Jackson Armstrong-Ingram: In Memoriam. Anthony Lee. A short biography of Baha'i scholar and archivist R. Jackson Armstrong-Ingram, who passed away October 20, 2004. [more]
-
K. C. Porter, in Mix. Gary Eskow. (Primedia Business Magazines & Media, 2002-04-01). Interview with a Baha'i music producer and arranger with A & M Records [more]
-
Kaiser Guilherme I: Breve biografia e excertos da epístola revelada por Bahá’u’lláh. Marco Oliveira. Short biography of Kaiser William I and the tablet revealed by Baha'ullah to this Monarch. [more]
-
Kids Say the Funniest Things, in Jack Boyd Memoirs. Jack Boyd. A compilation of wisdom out of the mouths of babes (mostly Jack and Eileen's kids) [more]
-
Life of Alexander Whyte, The. G. F. Barbour. , pages 554-5 (London: Hodder and Stoughton, Ltd., 1923). [more]
-
List of Descendants of Mirza Buzurg of Nur, the Father of Baha'u'llah, in Materials for the Study of the Babi Religion. E.G. Browne, comp. . [more]
-
Mason Remey and Those Who Followed Him. Universal House of Justice. A lengthy history of contemporary Covenant-breaking. [more]
-
May Ellis Maxwell, in A Compendium of Volumes of the Baha'i World I-XII, 1925-1954. Universal House of Justice, comp. , pages 516-28Detailed biography; includes photo. [more]
-
Memories of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, in The Bahá'í World 1979-1983. Ali M. Yazdi. , Vol. XVIII, pages 907-11 (Haifa: Baha'i World Center, 1986). [more]
-
Memories of Eileen, in Jack Boyd Memoirs. Jack Boyd. . Jack Boyd's memoir of his wife Eileen -- part given as her eulogy in Sudbury, Ontario, 18 Nov. 2004, more added later. [more]
-
Memories of Yellowknife, in Boyd Memoirs. Jack Boyd. An account of the Boyd family pioneering to Yellowknife, NWT from 1965 until 1969 [more]
-
Mirza Hossein R. Touty: First Baha'i Known to have Lived in the Philippines. Graham Hassall and Orwin Austria. [more]
-
Mountain and the Marriage, The, in Jack Boyd Memoirs. Jack Boyd. Jack Boyd's experience climbing Ben Nevis in Scotland (1956), and marriage to Eileen (1957). [more]
-
Napoleão III: Breve biografia e excertos da epístola revelada por Bahá’u’lláh. Marco Oliveira. Short biography of Napoleon III ans several paragraphs of one of the Tablets revealed by Baha'u'llah to Napoleon III [more]
-
Napoleão III: Breve biografia e excertos da epístola revelada por Bahá’u’lláh. Marco Oliveira. Short biography of Napoleon III and several paragraphs of one of the Tablets revealed by Baha'u'llah to Napoleon III [more]
-
Obituary: Knight of Baha'u'llah Mary Zabolotny McCulloch. Universal House of Justice, Kenneth McCulloch, and National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the US. [more]
-
Obituary: R. Jackson Armstrong-Ingram: April 30, 1954 -- Oct. 21, 2004, in South Bend Tribune. . An obituary of Baha'i scholar and archivist R. Jackson Armstrong-Ingram, who passed away October 20, 2004, from his hometown newspaper. [more]
-
Papa Pio IX: Breve biografia e excertos da epístola revelada por Bahá’u’lláh. Marco Oliveira. Short biography of Pope Pius IX and the tablet revealed by Baha'ullah to this leader of the Catholic Church. [more]
-
Pat Younger and Other Friends, in Jack Boyd Memoirs. Jack Boyd. Some of young Jack Boyd's friends and adventures in Scotland (1953-57). [more]
-
Rahmatu'llah Muhajir: Hand of the Cause of God the Treasure of All Humanity. Richard Francis. [more]
-
Rainha Vitória: Breve biografia e excertos da epístola revelada por Bahá’u’lláh. Marco Oliveira. Short biography of Queen Victoria and the tablet revealed by Baha'ullah to this Monarch. [more]
-
Remembering Bernard Leach, in The Bahá'í World 1979-1983. Trudi Scott. , Vol. XVIII, pages 929-31 (Haifa: Baha'i World Center, 1986). [more]
-
Robert Hayden, in Oxford Encyclopedia of American Literature. Christopher Buck. , 2:4, pages 177-181 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004-01). Biography of Robert Hayden, the first African American poet-laureate, and a celebrated Baha'i. This article calls Hayden "America's Bicentennial Poet Laureate" for the first time in scholarship. [more]
-
Rogers, Otto Donald, in The 1998 Canadian Encyclopedia. Norman Zepp. (McClelland & Stewart, Inc., 1997-09-06). [more]
-
Shirin Ebadi: A collection of newspaper articles. Articles about the winner of the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize who has championed the rights of the Baha'i community. [more]
-
Six Nations Track and Field Club, in Jack Boyd Memoirs. Jack Boyd. Jack's service as founder/coach of a track club for Native youth (1962-65) [more]
-
Sources for studying the life and writings of Abdu'l-Bahá: A topical bibliography. Jonah Winters, comp. [more]
-
Lawh-i-Páp. Tablet to Pope Pius IX: Biography of Pope Pius IX, in Encyclopedia Britannica. Various. . "Lawh-i-Páp". [more]
-
Lawh-i-Malikih. Tablet to Queen Victoria: Biography of Queen Victoria, in Encyclopedia Britannica. . "Lawh-i-Malikih". [more]
-
Lawh-i-Malik-i-Rus. Tablet to Tsar Alexander II: Biography of Tsar Alexander, in Encyclopedia Britannica. Various. . "Lawh-i-Malik-i-Rus". [more]
-
Timeline to the Baghdad Period: Themes of Early Tablets and Historical Personages Related to them. Kathryn Brown, Sharon Davis, and Karen Johnson. History and themes of and personages related to Baha'u'llah's Tablets of the Baghdad period (1853-63), including a graphical chronology. [more]
-
Traces That Remain: A Pictorial History of the Early Days of the Bahá'í Faith among the Japanese. Barbara R. Sims. (Bahá'í Publishing Trust, Japan, 1989) [more]
-
Traveller's Narrative, A: Written to Illustrate the Episode of the Báb. Abdul-Bahá. E.G. Browne, trans. [more]
-
Unfurling the Divine Flag in Tokyo: An Early Bahá'í History. Barbara R. Sims. (Bahá'í Publishing Trust of Japan, 1998) [more]
clection: Essay
http://bahai-library.com/index.php
-
After Communism: What Next?: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Apostasía en al Marco Jurídico Bahá'í, La. Badí Villar Cárdenas. Este ensayo constituye uno de los primeros esfuerzos por construir una marco jurídico para los procesos de apostasía y expulsión en la comunidad bahá'í. [more]
-
Are 'Abdu'l-Bahá's views on evolution original?, in Baha'i Studies Review. Keven Brown. , 7 (Association for Baha'i Studies of English-Speaking Europe, 1997). [more]
-
Baha'i Centenary, The: 100 years of the Bahá’í Faith in Britain, A Brief History: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Bahá'í Faith and Sexuality. R. Jackson Armstrong-Ingram and Various. A selection of internet postings from January-February 1996 on the teachings, history, and laws of the Baha'i Faith regarding sexuality, concluding with a discussion of some biological meanings of "gender." [more]
-
Baha'i Faith, The: How It Began: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Baha'i Faith, What Is It?: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Bahá'u'lláh's Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, in World Order. Marzieh Gail. , 12:2, pages 33-39. [more]
-
Baha'u'llah, the Messenger of God: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Baha'u'llah, The Promised One: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Biography of Hippolyte Dreyfus-Barney, in The Baha'i World. Laura C. Dreyfus-Barney and Shoghi Effendi. . A biography of the first French Baha'i, followed by telegrams and letters from Shoghi Effendi to Laura on Hippolyte's death. [more]
-
Kitáb-i Panj Sha'n. Book of Five Qualifications, The: Notes. Ahang Rabbani. "Kitáb-i Panj Sha'n". [more]
-
Community in Diversity: The New Man, in Bahá'í Studies Review. Peter Hulme. , 1:1 (Association for Baha'i Studies of English-Speaking Europe, 1991). [more]
-
Cyfres Ffeithiau Sylfaenol, Cyflwyno'r Ffydd Baha'i: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
De las Manifestaciones de Dios en las culturas precolombinas de América. Jorge Vallejo. Los antiguos americanos, ¿no eran hijos de Dios?, ¿no conocieron nunca al Dios Único y Verdadero?, ¿Dios, influyó o no en su progreso?. Obviamente han tenido que existir también voceros de Dios en estos lares para que estos pueblos alcancen las alturas de [more]
-
Dear Parent ... a Message from a Baha'i Parent: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Do the Baha’i Writings on evolution allow for mutation of species within kingdoms but not across kingdoms?. Bahman Nadimi. This paper explores the possibility that Baha'i writings on evolution allows for mutation of species within each of the kingdoms(such as vegetable or animal) but not across these kingdoms. [more]
-
Economics, A Baha'i Approach: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Ethics Survey: Answers to 55 Questions Submitted by Arthur Dobrin. Dianne Bradford, Fiona Missaghian, Udo Schaefer, and Robert Stockman. Jonah Winters, comp. Answers to questions submitted by Arthur Dobrin in preparation for a sourcebook in religious ethics for a college course at Hofstra University, New York, fall 2001. [more]
-
Fasting and the Baha'i Fast: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Filosofías y Analogías en Educación. Boris Handal Morales. Teorías educativas recientes han validado académicamente el rol de las creencias, opiniones y emociones en el aprendizaje y la enseñanza, inclusive en las llamadas ciencias fácticas como las matemáticas. [more]
-
Foreword: Studying the Writings of Shoghi Effendi, in Studying the Writings of Shoghi Effendi. Peter Khan. Martin Bergsmo, ed. (Oxford: George Ronald, 1991). [more]
-
God's Promise to Humanity: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Hinduism and the Baha'i Faith: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Holy Grail of Objectivity, The: Some Considerations for Balancing Sacred and Secular in Baha'i Scholarship, in Deepen Magazine (revised by author for web Dec., 2004). Rick Harmsen. , No 8 Vol. 3.3 Tsavo West Baha'i Institute, 1995) . Discussion of an apologetic nature about an interpretive or hermeneutic principle relating to Baha'i scholarship articulated by Shoghi Effendi. [more]
-
Homosexuality in the Kitab-i-Aqdas. Kamran Hakim. Discussion on homosexuality in the Aqdas, conducted on the listserver Talisman (I) in 1996. [more]
-
Infalibilidad: Un Ensayo. Susan Maneck. Badi Villar Cárdenas, trans. Spanish translation of short unpublished piece "Infallibility: An Essay." [more]
-
Inside The Origins of the Bahá'í Community of Canada 1898-1948: A Personal Narrative. Will C. van den Hoonaard. [more]
-
Introduction: Aims and Purposes of the Bahá'í Faith, in The Bahá'í World 1979-1983. David Hofman. , Vol. XVIII, pages 1-6 (Haifa: Baha'i World Center, 1986). 6-page Introduction to this Baha'i World volume. [more]
-
Introduction to Green Acre Baha'i School, in History of the Green Acre Bahá'í School in Eliot, Maine. Anne Gordon Atkinson and Robert Stockman. . [more]
-
Is the Bahá'í view of evolution compatible with modern science?, in Baha'i Studies Review. Eberhard von Kitzing. , 7 (Association for Baha'i Studies of English-Speaking Europe, 1997). [more]
-
Letters of Abdu'l-Bahá, in The Mission of Bahá'u'lláh and Other Literary Pieces. George Townshend. , pages 77-87 (Oxford: George Ronald, 1952). [more]
-
May Ellis Maxwell, in A Compendium of Volumes of the Baha'i World I-XII, 1925-1954. Universal House of Justice, comp. , pages 516-28Detailed biography; includes photo. [more]
-
Meaning of Suffering, The: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Millennium, The: A Baha'i View: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Moral Relativism and the Baha'i Faith. Brendan Cook. The essay challenges indiscriminate obedience to moral law. Right and wrong are relative to situations and to the needs of human beings in a given time and place. [more]
-
Seven Valleys. Mystical Aspects of the Baha'i Faith as presented in the Seven Valleys. LeRoy Jones. "Seven Valleys". [more]
-
Mystical content and symbology of Bahá'u'lláh's Four Valleys, in Seeker's Path. David Langness. . [more]
-
Necesidad de la Oracion para Mejorar Nuestras Vidas. Mirna León. Aquí algunas relexiones personales sobre la importancia de la oración en la vida espiritual. Lograr un estado espiritual de oración puede ayudarnos a tener una mejor calidad de vida incluyendo beneficios físicos y sicológicos. [more]
-
Obituary: Knight of Baha'u'llah Mary Zabolotny McCulloch. Universal House of Justice, Kenneth McCulloch, and National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the US. [more]
-
Pioneering Over Four Epochs, Section VI.2: Published Work: History of The Baha'i Faith in The Northern Territory of Australia. Ron Price. History of the Baha'i Community in the Northern Territory of Australia: 1947-1997. The 33 instalments are not arranged sequentially, but they are numbered for the convenience of readers. [more]
-
Pioneering Over Four Epochs, Section VIII:Poetry: Interviews With Ron Price. Ron Price. This series of more than 20 interviews held in the decade between 1996 and 2005 is essentially about Price's poetry written for the most part between 1992 and 2005. The interviews are simulated and are a means for the author to make an assessment of his [more]
-
Pioneering Over Four Epochs: Section VI: Essays: Section VI: Unpublished Essays, in A Study In Autobiography and A Study of Autobiography. Ron Price. , 5th EditionAfter 52 years of association with the Baha'i Faith, 1953-2005, I had collected some 200 unpublished essays written during the 4th and 5th epochs (1986-2005). I wrote many essays in epochs 2 & 3('44-'85),but they are virtually all lost in time's sands. [more]
-
Pioneering Over Four Epochs: Section VIII--Poetry: Essays on Poetry, in Pioneering Over Four Epochs. Ron Price. , 5th Edition (Not Published Yet). The essays here on the subject of poetry are, for the most part,introductions to my 56 booklets of poetry. My intention is to place all essays I have written on the subject of poetry in this document. [more]
-
Preparations for Bahá'í Funerals and Burials: Some practical notes. Mary K. Radpour, comp. (unpublished, 1998)A compilation of Baha'i directions for funerals and burials (i.e., this is not a compilation of direct quotations from the Writings). [more]
-
Rewriting the Script: Some thoughts on gender roles and the Baha'i Teachings. Sonja van Kerkhoff. [more]
-
Ruhi Problem, The. Anthony Lee. Observations on the practicality and success of the Ruhi project. [more]
-
Sikhism and the Baha'i Faith: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Some thoughts on Ecology: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Sustainable Development, A Baha'i View: Warwick Leaflet. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Warwick. [more]
-
Verse of Light, the Sadratu'l-Muntahá, and the Unfoldment of God's Plan, The. Shirley Macias. [more]
-
“Thee” and “thee” in the translation of the Súrih of the Temple (Súriy-i-Haykal), in Lights of Irfan. Khazeh Fananapazir. , 4, pages 179-80 (Wilmette, IL: Irfan Colloquia, 2003). [more]
collection: Article_unpublished
http://bahai-library.com/index.php
-
Apuntes sobre los Sabeanos. Badí Villar Cárdenas. Este articulo explora las fuentes bahá'ís en la Escritura Sagrada y la literatura bahá'í secundaria sobre el Sabeanismo y sus posibles orígenes. [more]
-
Arabic Grammar of the Bab, The. William McCants. Muslim detractors of the Bab have often criticized his grammar. Did the Bab make grammatical errors due to a poor knowledge of the language, or did he intentionally coin a new grammar? [more]
-
Bioprospecting and Indigenous Knowledge in Australia: Valuing Indigenous Spiritual Knowledge and its Implications for Integrated Legal Regimes. John Hunter and Chris Jones. Co-authored/painted paper by Aboriginal and 'Western' authors primarily focusing on spiritual issues in law. [more]
-
Black Roses in Canada's Mosaic: Four Decades of Black History. Will C. van den Hoonaard and Lynn Echevarria-Howe. [more]
-
Brief History of the Bahå'í Faith. Local Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Boise, Idaho, comp. [more]
-
Búsqueda de la Santidad, La. Walter Velásquez. ¿Es fácil ser un santo?, cada uno tiene la respuesta, pero no podemos negar que es un reto emocionante y a la vez necesario si queremos transformar y mejorar el mundo. [more]
-
Common Teachings from Chinese Culture and the Baha'i Faith: From Material Civilization to Spiritual Civilization, in Lights of Irfan: Papers Presented at the 'Irfán Colloquia and Seminars. Albert Cheung. , Book 1, pages 37-52 (Wilmette, IL: Irfan Colloquia, 2000). [more]
-
Contemporary developments in Baha’i studies: An examination using citation analysis, in H-Baha'i Occasional Papers in Shaykhi, Babi and Baha'i Studies. Seena Fazel. , 7:1. Investigation of contemporary developments using the technique of citation analysis, a widely used method to report trends in academia. [more]
-
Conversion, Transformation, and Sacrifice in the Revelation of The Bab. Peter Ashelman. Hermeneutics in early Babi/Baha'i history and its relationship to conversion. [more]
-
Disconnected Letters of the Qur'an and the Significance of the Number Nineteen. Robert T. Cameron. [more]
-
Documento de reflexión: Alvin Toffler y su visión del futuro. Farshad Esmailián. El presente documento de reflexión examina algunas obras del futurista Alvin Toffler como "La tercera ola" y "La creación de una nueva civilización" donde el autor identifica ciertos rasgos de una nueva civilización que está surgiendo en el mundo. [more]
-
Filosofía del Trabajo. Pedro Donaires Sánchez. El trabajo como un fin consistente en la realización de valores y no meramente como un medio para alcanzar bienes materiales. [more]
-
Historical Account of two Indian Babis: Sa'en Hindi and Sayyid Basir Hindi. Sepehr Manuchehri. [more]
-
La Ley, fundamento de la sociedad o restricción de la libertad?. Nicomedes Merma Aroni. La libertad no puede ser absoluta. Vivimos en una sociedad interdependiente. Algunas limitaciones a nuestra libertad son necesarias para evitar otras restricciones todavía peores. [more]
-
Loyalty to the Covenant and Critical Thought. Udo Schaefer. Harry Liedtke, trans. Nancy Ackerman, ed. An important commentary for Bahá’ís examining the balance of critical thought with loyalty to Bahá’í institutions. [more]
-
Nuqtat al-Kaf and the Babi Chronicle Traditions, in Research Notes in Shaykhi, Babi and Bahá'í Studies. Juan Cole. , 2:5. [more]
-
Pioneering Over Four Epochs, Section VIII:Poetry: Autobiographical Poetry 2005: Booklets 54-57. Ron Price. The first poem that I wrote was at the start of my pioneering life in 1962, but I did not keep any of my poems until 1980. I now have 26 years of poetry in my collection. The poetry here is from the 26th year of this collection of poetry--2005. [more]
-
Pioneering Over Four Epochs: Section VI: Essays: Section VI: Unpublished Essays, in A Study In Autobiography and A Study of Autobiography. Ron Price. , 5th EditionAfter 52 years of association with the Baha'i Faith, 1953-2005, I had collected some 200 unpublished essays written during the 4th and 5th epochs (1986-2005). I wrote many essays in epochs 2 & 3('44-'85),but they are virtually all lost in time's sands. [more]
-
Pioneering Over Four Epochs: Section VIII--Poetry: Essays on Poetry, in Pioneering Over Four Epochs. Ron Price. , 5th Edition (Not Published Yet). The essays here on the subject of poetry are, for the most part,introductions to my 56 booklets of poetry. My intention is to place all essays I have written on the subject of poetry in this document. [more]
-
Proceso de la creación artística, El: Una manifestación espiritual. David Cerpa Alba. La dinámica de la creación artística representa en todos los tiempos un vivo retrato de las aspiraciones espirituales que motivan a las personas. Este ensayo explora las fenomenológica de este proceso. [more]
-
Protocols of the Followers of Baha'u'llah: Anti-Baha'i propaganda in Iran. Abdu'l-Bab as-Sahyuni. [more]
-
Quranic Witness to Biblical Authority, The. Sam Shamoun. Written for a Muslim audience, this article expounds on the Muslim view that the Bible is authentically the Word of God. The article does not mention the Baha'i Faith, but its topic is relevant to Baha'i studies. [more]
-
Radio Bahá'í del Lago Titicaca, 20 años de historia. René Quiñonez. Un breve relato sobre los logros de un proyecto de desarrollo socio económico al servicio de los pobladores del altiplano peruano boliviano. [more]
-
Retórica Gnóstica de la Espiritualidad en las Escrituras Bahá’ís, La. Badí Villar Cárdenas. Este escrito contiene una sencilla exposición de la riqueza de expresiones gnósticas que abundan en la retórica bahá’í de la espiritualidad, al tiempo que demuestra una diferencia substancial en cuanto a la cosmogonía, el compromiso social y la afirmación [more]
-
Tablet (Lawh) in Bahá’í Usage. Todd Lawson. Meanings of the common Baha'i terms lawh (tablet), ketáb (book), sahífa (treatise), resála (epistle), etc. [more]
-
The Letters of Ron Price: 1960-2005: Pioneering Over Four Epochs, Section VII: Letters, in Pioneering Over Four Epochs: An Autobiographical Study and a Study In Autobiography. Ron Price. , 5th EditionVery few of my letters are on the internet since they are either personal, administrative or professional and I prefer to keep them confidential until at least my passing from this mortal coil. There are now 3000(ca)letters in 21 volumes. [more]
-
Use of Generative Imagery in Shoghi Effendi's Dispensation of Baha'u'llah. R. Jackson Armstrong-Ingram. [more]
-
Will and Testament: Translation and Commentary. Bab, The. Sepehr Manuchehri, trans. Sepehr Manuchehri, comp. The Will and Testament of the Bab: examination of four available MS, dates of issue, variations, exclusions, verse numbering followed by a running commentary on its tone, message and implications for the future of the Babi movement. [more]
| سايت خبري تحليلي بازتاب | www.baztab.com |
كد خبر : ۳۲۰۹۷ |
|
رضا حسينينسب
به تازگي مبحث سنگين و پرمايه تجدد در شريعت، توسط برخي از پژوهشگراني در دستور کار قرار گرفته است که گرچه در رشته تحصيلي خود متخصص هستند، ولي در زمينه درونمايههاي فقه اسلامي و تکامل خودجوش آن، از تخصص لازم بيبهرهاند. اين امر ميتواند به جاي اينکه پردهاي از چهره حقيقت بردارد، بر تراکم ابرهاي ابهام و شکاکيت در آسمان دين و دانش بيفزايد. به اميد اينکه نوشتار ذيل بتواند، مشوّقي براي همکاري مشترک پژوهشگران متخصص در فقه و کلام اسلامي از يک سو و دانشمندان فلسفه علم و ديگر دانشهايي که در تشخيص حکم يا موضوع تأثير دارند از سوي ديگر، در جهت طرح عميق اين مبحث حياتي باشد و تنها به مباحثات رسانهاي بسنده نشود. كد خبر : ۳۱۶۴۵ |
| سايت خبري تحليلي بازتاب | www.baztab.com |
|
در سال 1844 يك تاجر شيعه، ادعا كرد كه از سوي خدا الهاماتي به وي نازل شده و اين امر باعث شده است كه هزاران نفر به عقيده وي كه بعدها مذهب بهائيت خوانده شد، جذب شوند. به گفته «فولمر»، اذيت و آزارها از عقيدهاي كه بين روحانيون مسلمان ارتدوكس! وجود دارد، ناشي ميشود كه هرگونه ادعاي داشتن وحي و الهام پس از پيامبر(ص) را بدعت ميدانند.
در پي مرگ جنجالي يك بهائي در زندان يزد و «شهيد» ناميدن وي توطس «بيتالعدل» بهائيان، چند تن از بهائيان آمريكا، تجمعي برگزار كردند. |
| ۲۲ دي ۱۳۸۴ |
محمدعلي ابطحي، رئيس دفتر سابق خاتمي، در تازهترين مطلب وبلاگش نوشت: خيلي از دختر پسراي جوان که قصد ازدواج داشتند، علاقمند بودند که اجراي عقد توسط آقاي خاتمي صورت پذيرد. آقاي خاتمي هم هر چندي يکبار عقد چندين زوج را يکجا انحام ميداد. اولويت هم با فرزندان شهدا، کارمندان رياست جمهوري واصحاب فرهنگ وهنر بود. در روزهاي عقد اتفاقات جالبي ميافتاد. از رسمهاي دختران ايراني اين است که وقتي ميخواهند از آنان وکالت بگيرند، لااقل در ظاهر به راحتي جواب «بله» نميدهند. آقاي خاتمي هم ميگفت گل چيدن و اينها نداريم. يک بار مادر دختر خانمي به وي گفته بود بايد بعد از سه بار جواب «بله» را بگويي. او هم بعد از سؤال آقاي خاتمي جواب نداد. وقتي آقاي خاتمي گفت که من يک بار بيشتر نميپرسم و به شوخي گفت، اگه جواب ندي، ميروم. زد زير گريه و گفت تقصير مامانمه و گفت «بله». کلي خنديديم. يکي هم که شنيده بود آقاي خاتمي يک بار بيشتر نميپرسد تا آقاي خاتمي گفت خانم فلاني آيا .. و هنوز تکميل نکرده بود با عجله گفت «بله». گفتيم چقدر دستپاچه. عروس خانم هم که ديد بد جوري سه شده باز گفت تقصير مامانمه که گفته آقاي خاتمي را نبايد معطل کرد. بيچاره مامانها.

عبارات زير، گفتاري است از آقاي سروش، پخش شده از طريق اينترنت و خطاب به شيعيان، كه بدينوسيله به تحليل و پاسخ آن از طرف راقم اين سطور، اقـدام شده است:
«چگونه ممكن ميشود كه پس از پيامبر خاتم كساني درآيند و به اتكاء وحي و شهود سخناني بگويند كه نشاني از آنها در قرآن و سنت نبوي نباشدو در عين حال تعليم و تشريع و ايجاب و تحريمشان در رتبه وحي نبوي بنشيند و عصمت و حجيت سخنان پيامبر را پيداكند و بازهم در خاتميت خللي نيفتد؟ پس خاتميت چه چيزي را نفي و منع ميكند؛ و به حكم خاتميت، وجود و وقوع چه امري ناممكن ميشود؟»
عرض ميشود:
رسالت شخص رسول اللهٌ صلي الله عليه و آله، در چه بود؟
در رساندن پيامهاي الهي به مردم و آموزش آنان به آنچه را كه به صورت كتابي براي آنان فرستاده شده بود.
«و لقد جئناهم بكتاب فصٌلناه علي علم هدي و رحمة لقوم يؤمنون»
هركتاب علمي، به معلمي آگاه به رموز علمي آمده در آن كتاب، نياز دارد؛ ودر پي فهم و درك مسائل آمده درآن كتاب، بدون استفاده از معلم مخصوص آن برآمدن، جز اتلاف وقت، عدم موفقيت، وگمراهي، سودي ديگر نخواهد داشت.
خداوند متعال، شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، را به عنوان معلم اين كتاب علمي نازله از جانب خود، معرفي فرموده است:
«إنٌا أنزلنا إليك الذكرلتبيٌن للناس ما نزٌل إليهم»
پس لازمه درك و فهم مسائل علمي مطروحه در اين كتاب آسماني، تمسٌك به معلم انحصاري آن،يعني:شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، و فراگيري مطالبي است كه آن حضرت به عنوان تعليم، بيان فرموده است .
آيا آموزش و فراگيري مسائل و مطالب علمي، در يك مرحله براي انسان امكان پذير است؛ يا در مراحلي متعدد، و با اختصاص زماني معين براي هر مرحله ؟
شخصي كه در پي فراگيري دانش پزشكي است، آيا با يك مرحله به خدمت استاد علوم پزشكي رسيدن، ميتواند تمام علوم پزشكي را فراگرفته بگونهاي كه در رشته پزشكي ديگر به استاد نياز نداشته باشد ؟! هرگــز.
بديهي است، ابتدا بايد مقدماتي را فرا گيرد تا براساس آن، قدرت فهم مسائل پزشكي كه استاد در پي تبيين آن است، دراو به وجود آيد؛ و پس از به وجود آمدن قدرت درك مسائل پزشكي در دانشجو، از شرائط مهم موفقيت او در فراگيري، به حضور استاد رسيدن پياپي او، و گوش فرادادن و به خاطر سپردن تعاليم استاد است؛ كه درصورت عدم حضور دانشجو نزد استاد، و يا عدم حضور استاد در كلاس درس، عدم موفقيت دانشجو در فراگيري علوم پزشكي، قطعي است.
در تعليم كتاب علمي قرآن كريم، و ابلاغ رسالات الهي به مردم، آيا شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، در زمان حيات خود تنها بود، يا در اين امر خطير ياوري براي او از جانب خداوند متعال در نظر گرفته شده بود؟
با دقت و تدبر در حديث متفق عليه نزد جميع مسلمين بنام المنـزلة صادره از رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله:
«يا علي! أنت منٌي بمنزلة هرون من موسي إلا أنٌه لا نبيٌ بعدي»
(اي علي! موقعيت و مقام تو نسبت به من، همچو موقعيت و مقام هارون است به موسي؛ با اين تفاوت كه پس از من ديگر پيامبري نيست)
و با تدبر در شأن و مقام هارون نسبت به موسي(ع)، شراكت علي، عليه السلام، با رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، در ابلاغ رسالات الهي به مردم و در تزكيه و تعليم علوم قرآني به آنان، امري است كاملا مشهود.
حضرت موسي(ع) از خداوند متعال چنين تقاضا نمود:
«واجعل لي وزيرا من أهلي. هرون أخي. اشدد به أزري. و أشركه في أمري. كي نسبٌحك كثيراؤ و نذكرٌك كثيرا. إنٌك كنت بنا بصيرا. قال قد أوتيت سؤلك يا موسي. و لقد مننٌا عليك مرٌة أخري»
(خداوندا! از خانواده ام برايم ياوري قرارده، يعني: برادرم هارون را، و به او پشتم را محكم گردان، و او را در كارم شريك کن، تا تورا بسيار تسبيح گوئيم، و از تو بسيار ياد كنيم، كه تو به احوال ما بينا و بصيري. خداوند متعال فرمود: خواسته ات داده شد، وبار ديگر با برآوردن حاجتت، بر تو منت گذارديم)
خواسته حضرت موسي(ع) چه بود؟
شريك قراردادن خداوند متعال هارون را در كار او: «أشركه في أمري».
كار موسي(ع) چه بود؟
رسالاتي كه خداوند متعال به او سپرده، و ابلاغ آن را به مردم، از او خواسته بود.
با اجابت خداوند متعال خواسته موسي(ع) را، هارون در امر رسالت، شريك موسي(ع) گرديد؛ بدون اينكه اين شراكت، خللي را در رسالت موسي(ع) موجب شده باشد.
لازمه شراكت در امر رسالت و ابلاغ آن، دانائي شريك نبي به موضوع رسالت است، دانائي همچون دانائي خود نبي؛ و گرنه از شريك نبي در امر ابلاغ رسالات، كاري ساخته نخواهد بود.
حصول اين دانائي در شريك خاتم انبياء، يعني: رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، از چه طريق بود؟
«و لقد كنت أتٌبعه اتٌباع الفصيل أثر امٌه، يرفع لي في كل يوم من أخلاقه علما، و يأمرني بالاقتداء به. و لقد كان يجاور في كل سنة بحراء فأراه و لا يراه غيري.
ولم يجمع بيت واحد يومئذ في الاسلام غير رسول الله – صلي الله عليه وآله – و خديجة و أنا ثالثهما. أري نور الوحي و الرٌسالة، و أشمٌ ريح النبوة. و لقد سمعت رنٌة الشيطان حين نزل الوحي عليه، صلي الله عليه و آله، فقلت: يا رسول الله، ما هذه الرٌنٌة؟ فقال:
‹هذا الشٌيطان قد أيس من عبادته، إنٌك تسمع ما أسمع، و تري ما أري، إلاٌ أنٌك لست بنبيٌ، ولكنٌك لوزير و إنٌك لعلي خير›... »
(من همچو سايهاي به دنبال آن حضرت حركت ميكردم، و او هر روز نكتهاي تازه از اخلاق نيك را براي من آشكار ميساخت، و به من امر ميفرمود، به او اقتدا كنم. و مدتي از سال را مجاور كوه حراء ميشد، و تنها من اورا مشاهده ميكردم، وغير من ديگري او را نمي ديد. در آن روزها غير از خانه رسول الله،صلي الله عليه و آله، خانهاي كه در آن از اسلام سخني باشد، وجود نداشت؛ و در آن خانه جز حضرت رسول، صلي الله عليه و آله، و خديجه، و من كه سومين نفر آن جمع بودم، ديگري وجود نداشت.
من نور وحي و رسالت را ميديدم، و نسيم نبوت را استشمام ميكردم.
نالهاي از شيطان را شنيدم! از رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، پرسيدم: اين ناله، چيست؟ فرمود: اين شيطان است كه ازپرستش مايوس گرديده!
تو ميشنوي آنچه من ميشنوم، و ميبيني آنچه من ميبينم! با اين تفاوت كه تو پيامبرنيستيي؛ ليكن تو وزير من، و بر راه خيرقرار تو است)
لازمه حامل قرآن كريم شدن، طهارت ذاتي است؛ امري كه مشترك بين رسول الله،
صلي الله عليه و آله، و امامان معصوم،عليهم السلام، ازاهل بيت او است:
«إنٌما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس اهل البيت و يطهٌركم تطهيرا»
اختصاص يك نوع درود و صلوات برمحمد، صلي الله عليه وآله، واهل البيت(ع)،، صلواتي كه نمازهاي روزانه تمام شدني نيست مگر به آن، از شراكت آل، يعني: اهل البيت(ع) در ابلاغ رسالات رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، و از برخورداري آنان از همان ويژگيهاي لازم براي تزكيه و تعليم امت، و لازم براي پياده نمودن نظام تشريع كه رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، واجد آن بود، حكايت ميكند.
و براي تذكر بشر به معلم انحصاري قرآن بودن اهل البيت(ع)، و واجد ويژگيهاي لازم براي تزكيه وتعليم بشر، و براي پياده نمودن نظام تشريع، و واجد عين ويژگيهاي شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، بودن؛ خداوند متعال ميفرمايد:
«قل لاأسئلكم عليه أجرا إلاٌ المودٌة في القربي»
منظور از مودت نسبت به القربي، چيست؟
كشاندن امت را به سوي اطاعت از القربي:
«قل إن كنتم تحبٌون الله فاتٌبعوني يحببكم الله»،
اطاعتي كه وجوب آن را طي آيه شريفه:
«يا أيٌها الٌذين آمنوا اطيعوا الله و اطيعوا الرٌسول و أولي الأمر منكم»،
برهمگان اعلام فرموده است.
و شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، براي رساندن اين حقيقت به مردم، يعني: شراكت علي،عليه السلام، در خصائص نبوت و تبليغ رسالات، و بر عهده او(ع) بودن ادامه تزكيه و تعليم امت«أنا صاحب التنزيل و أنت صاحب التأويل»، و ادامه پياده نمودن نظام تشريع است كه، ميفرمايد: «من كنت مولاه فهذا عليٌ مولاه» .
پس ولايتي را كه علي(ع) واجد آنست، عينا همان ولايتي است كه به شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، از جانب خداوند متعال تفويض شده است:
« النبيٌ أولي بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم»
آيا، اين شراكت در ولايت، نقض خاتميت است، يا اتمام و اكمال آن ؟!
پياده شدن نظام تشريع جديد در يك مرحله وبگونهاي تام و تمام، نظامي كه جاودانگي و عدم بطلان از خصائص آن است: «لا يأتيه الباطل من بين يديه و لا من خلفه»، بگونهاي كه امت مربوطه بتواند به سطح معلمي براي سائر ملتها و نسلهاي بعد ارتقاء يابد، تا خللي از روي جهل و ناداني، به نظام تشريع واردنشود، امري بود غيرممكن.
پس لازمه اكمال دين و اتمام نعمت، و جود معلماني بود با همان خصيصه شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه وآله، براي تداوم تزكيه و تعليم امت، و رساندن تدريجي افراد لائق امت به سطح معلمي براي همان امت و سائر ملل و براي نسلهاي بعد.
بر اساس اين فرمان خداوند متعال«أطيعوا الله و أطيعوا الرٌسول و أولي الأمرمنكم»، هرخصيصه و ويژگي موحود در شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، كه واجب الاطاعة بودن او را موجب شده است، عينا اولوا الامرها واجد آنند، چون واجب الاطاعة گرديدهاند.
از مهمترين اين ويژگيها: دانائي، عصمت،و ولايت است؛ كه شرط لازم براي قابليت ادامه تزكيه و تعليم امت، و تداوم در پياده نمودن نظام تشريع است؛ و وجود چنين افرادي به عنوان معلم در نظام تشريع، لازمه تكميل خاتميت و تماميت نظام تشريع است، نه ناقض آن.
«يا أيٌها الرسول بلٌغ ما أنزل اليك من ربٌك، وإن لم تفعل فما بلٌغت رسالته و الله يعصمك من الناس، إنٌ الله لا يهدي القوم الكافرين»
ناگزير، لازمه اتمام ابلاغ رسالات خداوندي، معرفي و شناساندن فردي بود به امت، واجد همان ويژگيهاي شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه وآله، و در نتيجه واجب الاطاعة.
پس اتمام ابلاغ رسالات،يعني: انجام وظيفه محوله و اتمام خاتميت، به معرفي يار و ياور و جانشين خود به مردم بود؛ كه اين معرفي، موجب اكمال دين و اتمام وظيفه خاتميت شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، بود، نه ناقض خاتميت!
«من كنت مولاه فهذا عليٌ مولاه»
و براي تفهيم اين حقيقت، كه مسئوليني برگزيده از جانب خداوند متعال عهده دار ادامه پياده نمودن نظام تشريع از راه تزكيه و تعليم ميباشند، شخص رسول الله(ص)، طي توصيهاي متفق عليه نزد جميع فرق مسلمين، فرموده است:
«إنٌي تارك فيكم الثقلين، كتاب الله و عترتي ما إن تمسٌكتم بهما لن تضلٌوا أبدا»
و يا: «اهل بيتي أمان لأمٌتي عن ضلالتهم في أديانهم»
پس تمسٌك به قرآن كريم و اهل البيت(ع) اماني است براي امت اسلامي از ضلالت و گمراهي؛ و اين تمسٌك به زماني غير از زمان ديگر، محدود نشده است.
آيا، به دستور رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، كه دستور و امر خداوند متعال است، چون: «ماينطق عن الهوي إن هـو إلاٌ وحي يوحي»، سراغ اهل البيت(ع) رفتن، نقض خاتميت است يا ادامه و به منصٌه ظهور رساندن هرچه بيشتر آن؟!
پياده نمودن هر نظام جديد، و تعليم مردم به شناخت اصول آن نظام، و تربيت آنان به مراعات و پاي بندي به اصول آن، امري نيست قابل تحقق و پياده شدن در يك مرحله، و بدون نياز به گذشت زمان، و بدون نياز به فرد يا افرادي دانا به آن نظام و حاكم بر مردم براي پياده نمودن آن نظام.
آيا برداشت از اصول مدونه نظام تشريع، كه علمي است غير قابل دستيابي،مگر پس از نزول آن از جانب خداوند متعال، ونازله به صورت قرآن كريم براي نظامي كه ختم نظامها است، براي همگان يكسان است ؟!
براي شخصي چون رسول الله، صلي الله عليه وآله، برداشت يكجا و در يك مرحله از تمام علوم و معارف آمده در قرآن كريم، امري بود امكان پذير:
«إنٌـا أنزلنـاه في ليـلة القـدر»؛ ولي براي تفهيم و تبيين مسائل مطروحه در اين كتاب منزله، اكثريت قريب به اتفاق مردم به فراگيري كلمه به كلمه، و آيه به آيه، نيازمند بوده و هستند؛ و براي توجه و هشدار به اين نياز است كه خداوند متعال ميفرمايد:
«لا تحرٌك به لسانك لتعجل به. إنٌ علينا جمعه و قرآنه. فإذا قرأناه فاتٌبع قرآنه. ثم إنٌ علينا بيانه»
شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، و فردي كه در دامان او رشد و تربيت يافته، و ناظر به نور وحي و رسالت، داراي استعدادي بودند خدادادي، براي دريافت و برداشت
يك جا و در يك مرحله علوم و معارف وحياني كه خداوند متعال براي پياده نمودن نظام تشريع جديد، نازل فرموده بود.
پس لازمه اكمال دين و اتمام نعمت محوله به رسول الله،صلي الله عليه و آله، وجود افرادي بود واجد همان ويژگيهاي رسول الله(ص)، يعني :دانائي، عصمت، و ولايت، براي ادامه تزكيه و تعليم امت به مباني نظام تشريع، و سعي در ادامه همان راه رسول الله(ص)، در پياده نمودن نظام تشريع، نظامي كه لازمه جاودانگي آن، كمال و تماميت آن است براي همه دورانها.
«الائمة بمنزلة رسول الله (ص)، إلاٌ انهم ليسوا بانبياء»1
پياده شدن نظام، امري است تدريجي، همراه با تربيت مردم به رعايت اصول مدونه نظام، يعني: تزكيه؛ و آموزش آنان به آنچه كه در آن نظام براي آنان در نظر گرفته شده است، يعني :تعليم.
آگاهي هرچه بيشتر امت به مقررات نظام، و پاي بندي هرچه محكمتر آنان به عمل طبق مقررات نظام، رشد بيشتر امت خلف را نسبت به امت سلف موجب ميشود.
مسائلي است غير قابل پياده شدن در نظام، مگر پس از رسيدن امت به رشدي مطلوب كه حاصل شدني نيست مگر با تداوم تزكيه و تعليم.
چه كساني دانا به نظام تشريع در ادوار مختلفه، و دانا به قابليت يا عدم قابليت پياده شدن مرحلهاي از نظام در دورهاي مخصوص، ميباشند؟
آناني كه به جهت دارا بودن خصيصههاي رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، علم كتاب نزد آنان به وديعه سپرده شده است؛ و در نتيجه معلم انحصاري قرآن كريم ميباشند.
«ثمٌ أورثنا الكتاب الٌذين اصطفينا من عبادنا»
هر خصيصه و ويژگي در رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، كه واجب الاطاعة بودن آن حضرت را موجب شده، بايد عينا در اولوا الامر و جانشينان آن حضرت نيز موجود باشد، تا واجب الاطاعة بودن آنان قابل تحقق باشد.
لازمه عدم وجود چنين اشخاصي، محدوديت تزكيه و تعليم به زمان رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، و قطع كامل تزكيه و تعليم پس از رحلت آن حضرت(ص)مي باشد؛ زماني كه مقاومتها و عدم پذيرش هدايات، جنگها و ناآرامي هائي را موجب شده، كه در نتيجه فرصتهاي لازم براي تزكيه و تعليم را به اندك تقليل داده بود؛ و وجود مبارك مولي امير المؤمنين، عليه السلام، در آن زمان و پس از رحلت رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، بهترين عامل مؤثر در جبران نسبي از دست دادن فرصتها براي تزكيه و تعليم بود.
علوم وحياني اسلام و نظام تشريع، جاودانه است؛ بدون اينكه پيشرفت علمي بشر، در حقائق وحياني نازله، اثري منفي داشته باشد.
لازمه جاودانگي، ادامه تزكيه و تعليم بر اساس همان علوم و معارف وحياني است؛ و لازمه تداوم تزكيه و تعليم، وجود معلماني است واجد همان ويژگيهاي رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، و دانائيهاي او نسبت به نظام تشريع.
مولي اميرالمؤمنين،عليه السلام، ميفرمايد:
«تالله لقد علٌمت تبليغ الرسالات، و إتمام العدات، و تمام الكلمات. و عندنا – اهل البيت – أبواب الحكم، و ضياء الأمر...»
( بخدا سوگند ابلاغ رسالت ها، وفاي به عهد و پيمانها، و تفسير كلمات(خداوند) را من آموزش ديده ام، و درهاي دانش و روشنائي امو، نزد ما اهل البيت است)
نزد چه كسي مولا اميرالمؤمنين(ع)، آموزش تبليغ رسالات، ديده است؟ نزد رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله.
آيا، مراد از «تبليع رسالات» كه آموزش آن را مولا اميرالمؤمنين، عليه السلام، به خود نسبت ميدهد، غير از رسالاتي است كه شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، مامور به ابلاغ آن بوده است؟!
آيا، اين آموزش، براي هدف و پياده نمودن برنامهاي همچون ادامه تبليغ رسالات توسط رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله،بود؛ يا تنها براي آگاهي از چگونگي ابلاغ رسالات، بدون اجازه استفاده از آن ؟!
اگر آموزشي بوده باشد بدون رخصت در عمل به آن، يعني: بدون رخصت در تبليغ رسالات؛ پس دانشي بود عبث و بيهوده.
ولي مقام رسول الله،صلي الله عليه و آله، و مقام مولي امير المؤمنين، عليه السلام، أجلٌ از آنست كه به تعليم و تعلٌم دانشي غير مفيد و غيرقابل استفاده، پرداخته باشند.
و اگر اين دانش، ادامه همان روش تزكيه و تعليمي باشد كه رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، از جانب خداوند متعال به آن مامور بوده است، «يزكٌيهم و يعلمهم الكتاب و الحكمة»، پس لازمه آن اتمام رسالت و خاتميت است، و نه نقض آن. خطا در برداشت معنا و مفهوم خاتميت، موجب اينگونه سوء بر داشتها شده است.
خاتميت، يعني چه ؟
يعني: پايان يافتن تدوين نظام تشريع ها، به نظام تشريع نويني بنام اسـلام، به عنوان آخرين نظام تشريع.
و چون ابلاغ هر نظام تشريعي از طريق ارسال رسل و انزال كتب صورت ميگرفته است؛ پس رسولي كه آخرين نظام تشريع به وسيله او، وبا استفاده علوم وحياني قرآن كريم ابلاغ گرديده است، پايان رسل؛ و كتاب وحياني نازله بر او نيز، آخرين كتاب سماوي منزله ميباشد.
در آخرين مرحله آموزش در دانشگاهي قرار داشتن، نه به معناي پايان يافتن علم و دانش است؛ بلكه در آن دانشگاه كلاسي برتر و مرحلهاي بالاتر، تدارك ديده نشده است.
تفحص و تدبر در علومي كه تا مرحله پاياني به آموزش آن مبادرت شده، موجب گسترش دامنه آن علم، و رسيدن به حقائقي جديد ميشود.
خاتميت، به عنوان قطع برنامه پياده شدن نظام تشريع، پنداشته شده است!
نظامي كه جاودانه است، بايد در جميع ادوار پاسخگوي نياز بشر باشد، كه لازمه آن واجد بودن برنامه هائي است براي همه ادوار تا پايان اين جهان.
«ما فرٌطنا في الكتاب من شئ» (از بيان چيزي در كتاب فروگذاري ننموده ايم)
پيشرفت روز به روز بشر، امري است مشهود همگان.
آيا، بشر امروز از نظر بينش بابشر زمان نزول قرآن كريم، يكي است؟!
در نتيجه، آنچه مورد نياز بشر امروز است، غير از آنچه را است كه بشر زمان نزول قرآن كريم،يعني: زمان نزول دستور العمل نظام، به آن نياز داشت .
به همين دليل, تبيين علوم وحياني مندرج در قرآن كريم با خداوند متعال است:
«ثمٌ إنٌ علينا بيانه›؛ و به همين دليل, دو گونه تعويل براي قرآن كريم است. تعويل متصل همراه با نزول هر آيه مباركه اي؛ و تعويل علي المنفصل كه پس از آماده سازي افراد براي گيرائي مطالب وحياني، به تبيين آن توسط رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، و پس از او توسط ائمه اهل البيت(ع)، به آن مبادرت ميشده است.
آيا فردي كه در مرحله نخست آموزش مطالب علمي، كه آموزش آن طي مراحلي صورت ميپذيرد، قرار دارد؛ ميتواند بدون گذران مراحل نخست، گيراي مطالب علمي آمده در مراحل بعد و مرحله آخر باشد ؟!
آيا، دانش آموز كلاس اول دبستان، بدون گذران كلاسهاي دبستاني، ميتواند گيراي مطالب مورد بحث در كلاسهاي دبيرستاني شود؟!
پس، توان گيرائي علوم وحياني در فرد ايجاد نمي شود، مگر به آموزش وتعلم مرحله به مرحله آن، نزد معلمان انحصاري آن علوم.
«لا تحرٌك به لسانك لتعجل به، إنٌ علينا جمعه و قرآنه. و إذا قرأناه فاتٌبع قرآنه، ثم إنٌ علينا بيانه»
عبارت«ثمٌ إنٌ علينا بيانه» از آيه شريفه فوق الذكر، بر لزوم تعويل علي المنفصل علوم و معارف وحياني، دلالت دارد.
آموزش علوم و معارف وحياني و دسترسي به آن، از چه راهي ممكن است؟
«نحن الشعار و الاصحاب والخزنة و الابواب، و لاتؤتي البيوت إلاٌ من أبوابها؛ فمن أتاها من غير ابوابها سمٌي سارقا»
(ما اهل البيت، محرم اسرار حق، ياران راستين، گنجينههاي علوم پيامبر، و دربهاي ورودي آن هستيم. كسي به خانهها از غير درب وارد نمي شود؛ و هر كه از غير درب وارد خانهاي شود، سارق خوانده ميشود)
و يا: «ما من شئ تطلبونه إلاٌ و هو في القرآن، فمن اراد ذلك فليسألني»
اگر مطلبي از علي، عليه السلام، سئوال كنيم كه از رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، سؤال نشده باشد؛ آيا، پاسخ آن حضرت، ناقض خاتميت است يا اكمال و اتمام آن ؟!
بنا بر اين، راه انحصاري دستيابي به علوم و معارف وحياني نازله به رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، اهل البيت(ع) ميباشند.
پس، پاسخ دو سؤال زيرين، چنين خواهد بود:
(سوال -1):پس خاتميت چه چيزي را نفي و منع ميكند، وبه حكم خاتميت، وجود وقوع چه امري ناممكن ميشود ؟
پاسخ: نفي تدوين و حاكميت نظام تشريع ديگري غير از اسلام؛ وغير ممكن بودن برقراري هرگونه نظامي غير از اسلام. «من يبتغ غير الاسلام دينا، فلن يقبل منه»
(سوال-2): و چنان خاتميت رقيقي كه همه شئون نبوت را براي ديگران ميسور و ممكن ميسازد، بود و نبودش چه نفاوتي دارد ؟
پاسخ: با دقت در معناي خاتميتي كه ذكر آن گذشت؛خاتميت، شئون نبوت، يعني: حامل شريعتي جديد بودن، را براي كسي ميسور و ممكن نمي سازد؛ و بودش، حامل نظام تشريع جديد و آوردن آن را موجب شده؛ و نبودش، عدم وجود نظام تشريع جديد را, موجب ميشده است. شئون نبوت، امري نيست ميسور و ممكن براي ديگران.
تاليف كتاب داريم و تدريس آن. در تاليف كتاب، ممكن است مؤلف به مطالب جديدي رسيده و آن را با تاليف كتابي، در اختيار اساتيد فن قرار داده باشد .
اساتيد با استفاده از آمدههاي در آن كتاب، مسائل علمي جديد را براي دانش پژوهان تبيين، و به پياده نمودن آن ميپردازند؛ بدون اينكه اين تبيين و احيانا پياده نمودن رموز آمده در كتاب به صورت عملي، وارد آمدن خللي بر شئون مؤلف را موجب شود.
هرچه بيشتر در حقيقت «والسٌماء بنيناها بأيد و إنٌا لموسعون»، كه غير قابل تبيين در زمان نزول بود، و اخيرا بشر به آن پي برده است، كاوش و بررسي شود، اكمال هرچه بيشترخاتميت را در پي دارد، نه نقض آن و وارد آوردن خللي برآن.
با برداشت شما از خاتميت، كه به معناي قطع همه چيز با رحلت رسول الله،صلي الله عليه و آله، است؛ كاوش در اينگونه حقايق وحياني، خطا است!
واما اين سخن:
«شارح و مبين خواندن پيشوايان شيعه هم گرهي از اين كار فروبسته نمي گشايد. چرا كه كثيري از سخنان آن پيشوايان احكامي جديد و بي سابقه است و در آنها ارجاعي به قرآن يا سنت نبوي نرفته و نرفتني است و نشاني از تعليق و تبيين در آنها ديده نشده و و ديده ناشدني است، مگر اينكه در معناي «شرح و تبيين» چنان توسعه و تصرفي بعمل آوريم كه عاقبت سر از وحي و نبوت درآورد و كار پيشوايان، نه شرح شريعت، بل تداوم نبوت گردد. اين همان راهي است كه شيعيان غالي رفتهاند و امامتي ناسازگار با خاتميت بناكرده اند».
عرض ميشود:
به دعاوي بدون ارائه : نمونه، سند، ونشان، كذب و افتراء گفته ميشود.
با اين شدت! انكار عدم ارجاع احكام صادره از جانب اهل البيت(ع) را به كتاب و سنت، بدون ذكر نمونهاي از آن، حاكي از يك نوع كوردلي است كه ممكن است در پي تجاوز به حدود الهي، در فرد پديد آيد«كذلك نطبع علي قلوب المعتدين».
حول دعاوي مستند بر اكاذيب، و افترائات، چگونه ميتوان سخن گفت ؟!
آزاده باشيم، و سخن خود را بر حقائقي بنيان نهاده، و سپس به عنوان ادعاء، آن را مطرح كنيم.
از صاحب مقاله تقاضا ميشود: نمونه هائي از سخنان اهل البيت(ع) را كه به ادعاي ايشان« ارجاعي به قرآن يا سنت نبوي نرفته و نرفتني است»، ارائه دهد؛ تا سخن ايشان از دائره كذب، دروغ، و افتراء خارج شده؛ و در آن قابليت براي صرف وقت ايجاد شود، و براي پي گيري از صحت يا سقم، در خور انديشه شود.
صرف وقت در اكاذيب و افترائات، اتلاف وقت و اسراف در عمر، و فسادي در نظام تشريع است؛ كه اجتناب از آن ضروري است.
اضافه ميكنم: نبوٌت يعني حامل نظام تشريع بودن نبيٌ؛ و چون علمي است برتر از سائر علوم متداوله در هرامتي، و پياده نمودن آن منوط به تزكيه و تعليم در همه امت ها، امري كه با عكس العملها و موانعي بس بسيار مواجه ميشود، و فائق آمدن براينگونه موانع كار انبياء را بس مشكل و گاه غير عملي ميسازد، همچون امت نوح؛ پياده شدن آن در امت ها، مستلزم آموزش مرحله به مرحله يكايك امت، و در نتيجه به گذشت زماني بس طولاني نياز دارد.
در پياده نمودن نظام تشريع، مسئوليت اوصياء پيامبران اولوالعزم، عينا همان مسئوليت انبياء است در تزكيه و تعليم امت به آنچه در نظام تشريع، براي آن امت، در نظر گرفته شده است؛ بدون آنكه اين مشاركت، خللي را در امر رسالت انبياء اولوا العزم موجب شود.
و اما اين گفته:
«آدميان دانش خود را يا بي واسطه اكتساب و اجتهاد بدست ميآورند يا به واسطه آن. و دانش پيامبران از قسم نخست است. و اين دانش، يا مقرون به عصمت است يا نيست و دانش پيامبران از قسم نخست است. و اين دانش بي واسطه مقرون به عصمت، يا براي ديگران حجت است يا نيست و دانش پيامبران از قسم نخست است. حال شيعيان غالي همه اين مراتب سه گانه را براي امامان خود قائلاند وغافلند از اينگه چنين اعتقادي گويا با خاتميت نمي سازد. برآن دانش بيواسطه اجتهاد و اكتساب، نام وراثت نهادن، و عمل پيشوايان را تبيين ناميدن و خودشان را شارحان نه شارعان خواندن، مطلقا ماهيت امر را عوض نمي كند و از خاتميت جز اسمي باقي نمي گذارد.اين هم پذيرفتني نيست كه بگوئيد: «امامان هرچه دارند از پيامبر دارند» چون پيامبر خاتم نمي تواند منصبي را به ديگران اعطا و تفويض كندكه ختميت او را نقض نمايد و نبوت او را تداوم بخشد. از اينكه بگذريم، هر درجهاي از درجات قرب الهي براي سالكان، علي قدر مراتبهم ميسور است»
در پاسخ به اين سخن: «حال، شيعيان غالي همه اين مراتب سه گانه را براي امامان خود قائل اند»،
عرض ميشود: آيا جز عصمت، خصيصه و ويژگي ديگري ميتواند فرد را واجب الاطاعة نمايد ؟!
اگر عصمت نباشد، فرد مصون از گناه نيست؛ و واجب الاطاعة بودن درغيرمعصوم، غير قابل تحقق است،چون: «لاطاعة في معصية الله».
پيامبر اكرم، صلي الله عليه و آله، با خصيصه عصمت، و به فرمان الهي، واجب الاطاعة گرديده است.
صدور يك نوع فرمان راجع به واجب الاطاعة بودن پيامبر اكرم، صلي الله عليه و آله، و اولوا الامر، حاكي از وجود عصمت در اولوا الامر است.
«اطيعوا الله و اطيعوا الرسول و اولي الامر منكم»
حال، آيا انطباق اولوا الامر را بر اهل البيت(ع)، شما پذيرا هستيد يا نه، سخن ديگري است؛ لازم است اعلام فرمائيد.
در هرحال، عصمت به وجود پيامبر اكرم، صلي الله عليه و آله، منحصر و ختم نمي شود.
وجود جميع خصائص و ويژگيهاي موجود در پيامبر اكرم، صلي الله عليه و آله، كه موجب شده خداوند متعال اعلام فرمايد كه او وفرشتگانش بر نبيٌ درود ميفرستند، و در پي آن مؤمنان را نيز امر به درود فرستادن بر او نمايد:
«إنٌ الله و ملائكته يصلٌون علي النبيٌ، يا أيٌها الذين آمنوا، صلٌوا عليه و سلٌموا تسليما»، ولازمه صلوات همزمان بر نبي و برآل، و عدم ختم نمازهاي روزانه مگر با درود و صلوات بر نبيٌ و آل، دليلي است آشكار بر و جود خصائص و ويژگيهاي نبيٌ درآل، مطلبي كه اهل سنت نيز به آن اذعان و اعتراف دارند.
قال النيسابوري في تفسيره عند قوله تعال«قل لا أسئلكم عليه أجرا إلاٌ المودٌة في القربي» :
«كفي شرفا لآل الرٌسول و فخرا ختم التشهد بذكرهم و الصلوة عليهم في كلٌ صلوة»
باپذيرش عصمت در آل، يعني: اهل البيت(ع)، كذب و دروغ را در ساحت مقدس آنان، نمي تواند راهي باشد.
علي اميرالمؤمنين،عليه السلام، ميفرمايد:
«نحن شجرة النبوة، ومحطٌ الرٌسالة، ومختلف الملائكة، و معادن العلم، و ينابيع الحكم، ناصرنا و محبٌينا ينتظر الرحمة، و عدونا ومبغضنا ينتظر السطوة»
(ما‹اهل البيت› شجره نبوت، جايگاه رسالت، محل رفت و آمد فرشتگان، معادن دانش، وچشمه سارهاي حكمتيم. ياران و دوستان ما در انتظار رحمت پروردگار، و دشمنان ما در انتظار عقاب او هستند)
لازمه شريك رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، بودن اهل البيت(ع) در امر تبليغ رسالات، مجهز بودن آنانست به همان ويژگيها و خصائصي كه پيامبر اكرم(ص) واجد آن بود؛ بدون آنكه بر نبوت و خاتميت آن حضرت(ص) خللي وارد آيد.
خاتميت نه به معناي قطع انوار هدايات الهي، قطع برنامه تزكيه و تعليم امت، و قطع ادامه پياده شدن نظام تشريع است؛ بلكه به معناي پايان يافتن ارسال رسل براي آوردن نظام تشريع ديگري، غير از اسلام، است.
كافي است دقت در معناي خاتميت، و سپس دقت در حديث المنـزلة كه متفق عليه نزد جميع مسلمين است.
اگر به عصمت در اهل البيت(ع) قائل باشيم، لازمه فرموده اميرالمؤمنين(ع):
«أري نور الوحي و الرٌسالة، و أشمٌ ريح النبوة»؛ وفرمايش رسول الله،صلي الله عليه و آله:
«إنٌك تسمع ما أسمع، و تري ما أري...»
آگاهي آن حضرت به علوم وحياني است كه بالاصالة بر رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، نازل ميشد، و بالتبع آن حضرتش گيراي آن بود.
واما اين گفته:
«تا اين جهان به نور وجود حضرت خير البشر منور بود، اين احكام ظاهر نبود و از آن سرور به مردم نرسيده بود و بعد از رحلت نبي و اقطاع وحي الهي، حكم شرعي متجدد نمي تواند شد. پس قرار اين نوع احكام شرعيه به چه نحو ميتواند شد و علم به آنها از چه راه حاصل ميشود»
عرض ميشود:
قرآن كريم، كتابي است علمي براي نظام تشريعي جاودانه؛ كه لازمه جاودانگي، در بر داشتن اين كتاب است آنچه را كه بشر باديه نشين زمان نزول، بشر متمدن كنوني، و تا آخرين بشر متمدن جهان هستي، نياز مند آن باشد.
«ما فرٌطنا في الكتاب من شئ» ويا: «لا رطب و لا يابس إلاٌ في كتاب مبين»، براين امر دلالت دارد.
سراغ روايات نمي روم, و تنها به يكي دو فرموده باز گو شده از مولي اميرالمؤمنين، عليه السلام، اكتفا ميكنم.
حضرتش(ع) فرموده بود:
«ما من شئ تطلبونه إلاٌ و هو في القرآن، فمن اراد ذلك فليسألني»
آيا، مخاطب اين فرموده، تنها مردم صدر اسلام بودند؛ يا خطابي است به بشريت تاپايان هستي او در اين جهان؟
پس چه بسيار مسائلي در قرآن كريم كه به يكي از دلائل زيرين، هنوز باز نشده است.
1- نرسيدن زمان لازم براي پياده شدن آن قسمت از نظام.
2- در غيبت بسر بردن امام معصوم، صلوات الله عليه، كه عالم بكل ما في القرآن است.
به جهت همين عدم امكان دستيابي به جميع علوم قرآني است، كه تاكيد فرمودهاند در زمان غيبت، دين موضوع سياست قرار داده نشود؛ زيرا ممكن است مسائلي عنوان شود كه دانش شما به علوم قرآن، كافي براي پاسخ به آن مسائل نباشد.
به عنوان مثال عرض ميكنم:
آيا، موضوع توان بشر به سفر به كرا ت آسماني، و گسترش روز افزون جهان آفرينش در زمان نزول قرآن كريم، باسلطه هيئت بطلميوسي برجهان، قابل طرح و پياده شدن بود ؟!
هر دو موضوع به عنوان بيان حقيقتي، در قرآن كريم آمده است؛ ولي چون زمان، پياده شدن آن برنامهها را اقتضاء نمي كرد، آن حقائق تبيين نگرديد.
1- «يا معشر الجن و الإنس إن استطعتم أن تنفذوا من اقطار السماوات و الارض فانفذوا، لا تنفذون إلاٌ بسلطان»
2- «و السماء بنيناها بأيد و إنا لموسعون»
آيا، حال كه زمان مناسب براي تبيين آن فرا رسيده، اگر تبيين شود؛ چون به نظر شما ختم نبوت به معناي ختم برنامه پياده شدن نظام تشريع است، و با رحلت نبي اكرم (ص) و اقطاع وحي الهي حكم شرعي مجدد نمي تواند شد، تبيين اين حقايق و مانند آن، امري باطل است ؟!
ابتدا به تربيت مردم در باره لزوم و وجوب رعايت مقررات پرداخته ميشد، يعني:«تزكيه»؛ و ضمن آن هريك را، هنگام پيش آمدهائي فردي و يا اجتماعي، با قانون و مقررات مربوط به آن پيش آمد، آگاه مينمودند؛ و پس از پياده شدن آن قانون خاص در مرحله اي، آن را به صورت عام براي همگان به عنوان قانوني لازم الاتباع، اعلام ميداشتند.
شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، كه قرآن كريم براي او يكجا نازل شده بود، بالاصالة، و مولي علي،عليه السلام، كه در دامان نبي اكرم(ص) پرورده شده، و ناظر به انوار نازله وحياني بود،بالتبع، از محتواي قرآن كريم و آنچه را كه خداوند متعال از فرمودههاي خود اراده فرموده بود، به طور كامل آگاه بودند؛ نه آگاهي و دانشي تنها مختص زمان وحي، بلكه براي مراحل مختلفه پياده شدن نظام تا آخر اين جهان هستي.
با رحلت رسول الله، صلي اله عليه و آله، پياده شدن نظام تشريع متوقف نشد؛ بلكه تا جهان باقي است، پياده شدن اين نظام در مراحل مختلفه همچنان ادامه خواهد داشت.
در زمان حيات رسول الله،صلي الله عليه و آله، مراحلي از نظام پياده شد؛ وپس ازرحلتش(ص)، مراحلي ديگر پياده گرديد.
و همانگونه كه عرض شد، اين پياده شدن پس از مواجهه افراد جامعه بامشكلاتي, و حل آن طبق مقررات نظام جديد، براي آحاد امت تفهيم و تبيين ميشد؛ و اين تبيين و تفهيم نياز به وحي جديد نداشت، چون دستور العمل نظام به طور تمام و كمال در قرآن كريم آمده است؛ و تنها شرط لازم براي تبيين، دانش به علوم آمده در اين كتاب آسماني بود كه در علي اميرالمؤمنين، عليه السلام، در زمان حيات رسول الله،صلي الله عليه و آله، وبالتبع در سائر امامان معصوم،عليهم السلام، از ذريه علي،عليه السلام، به وجود آمده بود.
آيا، بدون به وجود آمدن دانش نسبت به تمام علوم و معارف وحياني آمده در قرآن كريم، در علي(ع)، شخص رسول الله (ص) فرموده است: ظمن كنت مولاه فهذا عليٌ مولاه؟!
همين عبارت، به تنهائي براي اثبات واجد بودن علي،عليه السلام، تمام خصائص و ويژگيهاي موجود در نبي اكرم(ص)، ولازم براي ولايت بر امت، و لازم براي تداوم پياده نمودن نظام تشريع، كافي است .
تنها فرقي كه بين رسول الله(ص)، با علي اميرالمؤمنين(ع)، از نظر نظام تشريع جديد، وجود دارد: حامل و عالم بودن رسول الله،صلي الله عليه و آله، به نظام تشريع، و تنها عالم بودن علي اميرالمؤمنين(ع) نسبت به آنست؛ كه حامل بودن همان رسالت و نبوت است.
به اين گفته دلالت دارد اين عبارت از خطبه غدير رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، هنگام معرفي علي اميرالمؤمنين، عليه السلام، را به مردم:
«...ما من علم إلاٌ و قد علمته عليٌـا و هو الإمام المبين»
(دانشي نبود مگر آنكه من آن را به علي آموختم، و او است امام مبين)
بنا براين، علوم و معارف قرآن كريم، كه «فيه تبيان كلٌ شئ» است، به صورت تام و تمام در اختيار علي، عليه السلام، قرار داده شده بود.
آيا، مراد از«تبيانا لكلٌ شئ» بودن قرآن كريم، تبيين امور و مسائل زمان نزول قرآن كريم است؛ ويا به جهت جاودانگي، تبيان همه امور و مسائل، تا پايان جهان هستي ؟
بنابراين، پياده نمودن نظام تشريع، و برقراري قوانين و مقررات آمده درآن، و تعليم امت را نسبت به آن، نياز به حيات رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، و نياز به وحي جديد، ندارد؛ بلكه دانش به محتويات علوم وحياني آمده در قرآن كريم همراه با عصمت، كه امري است قرار گرفته دراهل البيت (ع)، براي اين منظور كافي است.
به همين جهت است توصيه و تاكيد رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، نسبت به تمسٌك امت به: الثقليـن، يعني: قــرآن + اهل البيت(ع).
با اين توضيح، اگر مشكل همچنان لاينحل، و جواب پرسش زيرين:
«وحالا چنين اعتقادي با خاتميت پيامبرچگونه قابل جمع است، پرسشي است كه پيگيرانه از تشيٌع غالي بايد پرسيد و نوميدانه به انتظار پاسخ بايد نشست»، داده نشده است، موارد اشكال خود را بر اين توضيح اعلام داريد؛ تا به توضيحي يشتر، مبادرت شود.
و اما امامت و ولايت، در مكتب تشيع خاص اهل البيت(ع) است؛ و امري است، همچون رسالت، انتخابي از جانب خداوند متعال.
در تعريف امامت، رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، ميفرمايد:
«سمٌي الإمام إماما لأنٌه قدوة للناس، منصوب من قبل الله تعالي ذكره مفترض الطاعة علي العباد»
(امام، امام ناميده شده چون الگو و سرمشقي است براي مردم، منصوب به اين مقام از جانب خداوند متعال، و واجب الاطاعة براي همگان).
امـام فردي است منصوب به امامت از جانب خداوند متعال، ولازمه واجب الاطاعة بودن امام، وجود ويژگي عصمت است در او؛ كه در غير اين صورت، امامت غير قابل تحقق است.
ويا: فرموده ثامن الحجج علي بن موسي الرضا،صلوات الله عليه، در مورد امامت مولي امير المؤمنين، عليه السلام:
«إنٌ الإمامة لا تكون بفعل منه في نفسه، و لا بفعل من الناس فيه اختيار او تفضيل او غير ذلك، إنٌما يكون بفعل من الله عزٌ و جلٌ فيه، كما قال لإبراهيم:‹إنٌي جاعلك للناس إماما›، و كما قال عزٌ و جلٌ لداود(ع): ‹يا داود، إنٌا جعلناك خليفة في الأرض›...
فالإمام إنٌما يكون إماما من قبل الله باختياره إيٌاه»
(امامت كاري از جانب خود آن حضرت، يا كاري از جانب مردم كه در آن اختيار، برتري، ومانند آن در نظر گرفته شده باشد، نبود؛ بلكه كاري بود از خاوند متعال در او(علي)؛ چنانچه به ابراهيم ميفرمايد:‹ما تو را براي مردم امام قرار داديم›؛ و يا فرموده اش خطاب به داود(ع):‹ما تو را خليفه در روي زمين قرار داديم› ...پس امام تنها از جانب خداوند و به انتخاب اوا، امام ميشود)
ويا:
«إنٌ الأئمة من قريش غرسوا في هذا البطن من هاشم، لاتصلح علي سواهم، و لا تصلح الولاة من غيرهم »
(امامان از قريش اند، و درخت وجودشان در اين دودمان از هاشم غرس شده است؛ ديگران را نه شايستگي امامت و رهبري است؛ و نه شايستگي ولايت وحكومت)
«ليس علي الإمام إلاٌ ما حمٌل من امر ربٌه »
( برعهده امام نيست، مگر آنچه از جانب پروردگارش به عهده او قرار داده شده است)
از اينگونه فرمودهها در كتب روائي سني و شيعه، كه بر انحصاري بودن امامت در اهل البيت(ع)، و بر منصوب بودن آنان از جانب پروردگار دلالت دارد، بسيار است؛ كه در صورت نياز، به ذكر آنان خواهم پرداخت.
لازمه تحقق«ولايت مطلقه اي»،كه ادعا ميشود، عصمت است؛ خصيصه و ويژگي كه منحصر در اهل البيت(ع) است.
دعاوي و عملكرد اهل عرفان را نبايد به حساب دين گذاشت، چون هنگامي كه اهل عرفان ادعاي الوهيت و خدائي را برهمگان جائز بدانند:«صحٌ له التـألٌه»3، سائر دعاوي، بدون رعايت تطابق آن با اصول دين و مذهب، كار مشكلي نخواهد بود.
ائمه اهل البيت(ع) برائت خود را از اهل عرفان (صوفيه) با صراحت و طي عباراتي گوناگون اعلام فرمودهاند. براي آگاهي بيشتر به كتاب راقم اين سطور به نام «فلسفه و عرفان از نظر اسلام)، مراجعه فرمائيد.
الگو و سرمشق همگان در عمل مطابق علوم و معارف اسلامي، و چگونگي بهره وري از آن در امور فردي و اجتماعي، تنها و تنها اهل البيت(ع) ميباشند:
«لقد كان لكم في رسول الله أسوة حسنة».
برداشت ناصحيح از خاتميت،و رحلت رسول الله،صلي الله عليه و آله، را، به معناي قطع رابطه خلق با خدا پنداشتن، اينگونه اشكالات عقيدتي را موجب ميشود.
عرض شد: خاتميت يعني: ختم همه نظامهاي تشريع پيشين به اسـلام، و ختم
دستورالعمل نظامهاي تشريع پيشين به دستور العمل جديدي به نام قرآن كريم، بدون قطع رابطه خداوند متعال با خلق خود.
چون، در اين نظام تشريع جديد نيز، هدايت همگان به دست خداوندمتعال است:
«إنٌ علينا للهدي»، ويا: «يزيد الله الذين اهتدوا هدي»،
بدون نياز به واسطهاي به نام رسول يا نبيٌ براي اخذ اين هدايات به صورت وحي
«إنٌا هديناه السبيل إمٌا شاكرا و إما كفورا» ويا: «فألهمها فجورها و تقواها»،
كه الهامي است مستقيم، بدون نياز به رسول يا نبيٌ.
شرط قرارگرفتن در صراط مستقيم، و برخورداري از جميع نعم و آلاء الهي:
«وأسبغ عليكم نعمه ظاهرة و باطنة»، متابعت كامل از دستورالعمل نظام تشريع نازله و مدونه در كتابي به نام قرآن كريم است.
« اتٌبعوا ما أنزل اليكم من ربٌكم و لا تتٌبعوا من دونه أوليـاء، قليلا ما تذكٌرون»
و اما اين گفته:
«شيعيان با طرح نظريه غيبت، خاتميت را دو قرن و نيم به تأخير اندختند و گرنه همان آثاري كه بر غيبت مترتب است بر خاتميت هم متفرع است، با اين تفاوت كه براي خاتميت ذاتي رسول، تبيين خردپسندتري ميتوان عرضه كرد تا براي غيبت عرضي و ناگهاني و نا منتظر امام منتظر»
عرض ميشود:
در اين انديشه نيز، همان برداشت نابجاي از خاتميت، حاكم است.
خاتميت، يعني آورنده آخرين نظام تشريع براي بشر، نظام تشريعي تام و تمام با دستور العملي مدون و مناسب براي بشر، و لازم الاتباع تا پايان اين جهان.
رشد روز افزون بشر، عدم اقتضاء پياده شدن نظام را در يك مرحله و در زمان نزول دستور العمل نظام، يعني: زمان نزول قرآن كريم، در پي داشت.
ناسخ و منسوخها در زمان وحي، به چه معنا است؟
قانوني به صورت موقت ابلاغ ميشد، تا مردم را براي پذيرش قانون اصلي نظام آماده سازد؛ و پس از آمادگي و ابلاغ قانون اصلي، قانون موقت نسخ ميشد.
«ما ننسخ من آية او ننسها نأت بخير منها او مثلها»
در دستورالعملي كه براي اين نظام تشريع فرستاده شده از تبيين چيزي كه ممكن است روزي بشر، تا پايان اين هستي، به آن نياز داشته باشد، كوتاهي نشده است.
«ما فرٌطنا في الكتاب من شئ» و «نزٌلنا عليك الكتاب تبيانا لكل شئ»
با رسيدن بشر به رشدي پذيراي اموري نوين، نظام جديد كه همه اصول و فروع آن در قرآن كريم آمده است، پياده خواهد شد.
چه كسي از عهده پياده نمودن كامل اين نظام، مطابق دستور العمل از پيش فرستاده شده، برمي آيد ؟
كسي كه واجد همان خصائص و ويژگيهاي شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، بوده و با برخورداري از عصمت و دانش كامل نسبت به دستور العمل نظام، قرآن كريم، دانشي كه در اختيار افراد منتخب و ويژهاي است:
«ثمٌ أورثنا الكتاب الذين اصطفينا من عبادنا»
همراه با ولايت كليهاي بر همه چيز و همگان، وقدرت و توان براي پياده نمودن نظام و دفع عكس العمل ها؛ چون: «ليس شئ أبعد من عقول الرجال من تفسير القرآن».
اگر پياده شدن اين نظام در زمان رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، امكان پذير ميبود؛ آيا به تأخير انداختن آن، و محروم داشتن بشريت از بهره وري از چنين نظامي كامل، ظلم به حساب نخواهد آمد؟!
اگر قانوني از قوانين اين نظام توسط يكي از ائمه اهل البيت(ع)، با وجود قبض يدها، روشده است كه در زمان رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، رو نشده بوده است، به دليل اقتضاء زمان براي ظهور آن بوده است؛ و هيچگاه اهل البيت(ع) خودسرانه و براساس رأي خود، حكمي صادر نفرموده و فتوائي ندادهاند. به اين حقيقت دلالت دارد فرموده صادق آل محمد، صلوات الله عليهم:
«ما من أمر يختلف فيه إثنان إلاٌ و له أصل في كتاب الله، لكن لا تبلغه عقول الرجال»
وبا اين اعلام رسمي:
«إنٌا لو كنٌا نحدثكم برأينا و هوانا لكنٌا من الهالكين، و لكنا نحدٌثكم بأحاديث نكنزها عن
رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، كما يكنز هؤلاء ذهبهم و ورقهم»
(اگر به رأي و هواي نفس خود با شما سخن ميگفتيم، از هلاك شوندگان بوديم؛ و لكن
با شما سخن ميگوئيم به سخناني كه از رسول خدا(ص) ذخيره نموده ايم؛ همانگونه كه
ديگران طلا و اوراق بهادار خود را ذخيره ميكنند)
آيا، ممكن است كساني كه نزد شما:
«در جلالت شأن آن بزرگواران سخن و نزاعي نيست»،
خلاف گفته خود، عمل نموده باشند؟!
آيا، پياده شدن هرچه كاملتر نظام، كه لازمه اش رشد هرچه كاملتر بشريت براي گيرائي مسائلي نوين است، اتمام خاتميت است يا ناقض آن؟!
پس، آثاري كه بر غيبت مترتب است، يعني: رشد بشريت و در نتيجه اقتضاء پياده شدن نظام تشريع بالتمام و الكمال، از آثار خاتميت و مكمل آنست، نه ناقض و وارد كننده خللي برآن.
و اما اين گفته:
«رهاسازي عقل انساني» و «به خود وانهادگي» آدميان را كه از بركات خاتميت برشمرده بودم، مدلولش آن نيست(چنانكه شما پنداشته ايد) كه عقل در اسارت ديانت است و انبياء دشمن خرد ورزي اندو با پايان گرفتن دوره نبوت، ايام طربناك آزادي فرا ميرسد. بلكه معنايش اين است كه پس از در گذشت خاتم رسولان، آدميان در همه چيز حتي (وبالاخصٌ)در فهم دين به خود وانهادهاند و ديگر هيچ دستآسماني آنان را پا به پا نمي برد تا شيوه راه رفتن بياموزد. و هيچ نداي آسماني تفسير«درست» و نهايي دين را در گوش آنان نمي خواند تا از بد فهمي مصون بمانند. راه دينداري از آن پس،جون راه زندگي، از ميان زدوخوردها ميگذرد و تكامل خود را نه از دخالتهاي گاه و بيگاه ماورائي، بل از تنازع و تعاون خردهاي وارسته
زميني ميگيردكه در نقد و فهم و تحليل، بي پروا و از تقليد رستهاند. اين رهايي از دخالت مستقيم آسمان را شيعيان از دوران غيبت مهدي آغاز ميكنند.
عرض ميشود:
هيچگاه انسان به خود وگذاشته نشده و نمي شود، چه قبل از ظهور رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، و چه پس از ظهور.
برداشت نابجاي از خاتميت، ايجاد چنين تخيلاتي را موجب شده است!
خداوند متعال مالكيت خود را برنظام هستي رها ننموده، تا موجودي از موجودات آن به نام انسان، يله رها شده و به خود واگذاشته شده باشد.
«أيحسب الانسان أن يترك سدي» (آيا انسان به اين پندار است كه يله رها ميشود)
اقدام به انجام هركاري، در انساني كه از اختياري جزئي برخوردار است، به عهده انسان؛ ولي تحقق انجام يا عدم انجام آن كار،، به اذن خداوند متعال است.
«ما قطعتم من لينة او تركتموها قائمة علي اصولها فبإذن الله»
(قطع درختي، يا باقي گذاردن آن بر تنه اش، به اذن خداوند است)
از كجا به اين پندار رسيده ايد كه «پس از در گذشت خاتم رسولان، آدميان در همه چيز حتي (وبالاخص) در فهم دين، به خود وانهاده اند»؟!
شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، حامل پيامي بود براي انسانها از جانب خداوند متعال مبني بر پايه گذاري نظام تشريعي نوين، و مامور به ابلاغ اين نظام به مردم آن روزگار بلاواسطه، و براي روزگاران پس از خود با واسطه؛ و مامور به جا گذاردن منشور اين نظام نوين را پس از خود در اختيار مردم، همراه با معرفي آناني كه پس از او، تبيين، تعليم، و آموزش اين منشور، در توان و قدرت آنان بود:
«مثل اهل بيتي كسفينة نوح من ركبها نجي و من تركها غرق»
كه حديثي است متفق عليه بين سني و شيعه؛و از اينگونه احاديث، چه بسيار!
هدايت انسانها منوط به فراگيري اين منشور نظام، يعني: قرآن كريم، نزد معلمان انحصاري آن و معرفي شده از جانب رسول الله، (ص)، و عمل طبق آن ميباشد؛ و روي اين نكته پيامبر خاتم(ص)، بس تاكيد فرموده است.
«من التمس الهدي في غير القرآن أضلٌه الله»،
«من ابتغي العلم في غير القرآن أضلٌه الله»
با ارسال پيامبرخاتم(ص)، همراه با منشوري حاوي آنچه را كه ممكن است بشر روزي به آن نياز داشته باشد، و با اعلان رسمي :«قد جائكم من الله نور و كتاب مبين»، خداوند متعال بشر را به تنها راه اصلي سعادت، ميخواند.
اگر بشر در همه چيز و بالاخص در امر دين، به خود واگذاشته شده بود؛ ديگر اينهمه اوامر و نواهي و وعد و وعيدها، و بشر را به متابعت از رهنمونهاي آمده در قرآن كريم امر نمودن، معنا نداشت.
«اتٌبعوا ما أنزل اليكم من ربٌكم و لا تتٌبعوا من دونه أولياء قليلا ما تذكرون»
(از آنچه از جانب پروردگارتان برشما نازل شده، پيروي كنيد؛ و از اولياء ديگري جز او پيروي نكنيد؛ چه كم متوجه ميشويد!)،
هذا صراطي مستقيما فاتٌبعوه و لا تتٌبعوا السبل فتفرٌق بكم عن سبيله، ذلكم وصٌاكم به لعلٌكم تتٌقون»
آيا، شخص رسول الله(ص)، در زمان حيات به همه آحاد امت دست رسي داشت، تا آنان را پا به پا ببرد وشيوه راه رفتن به آنان بياموزد ؟!
كه پس از رحلتش(ص)، احساس چنين كمبودي در شما بوجود آمده است؟!
«فذكٌر إنٌما أنت مذكٌر، لست عليهم بمصيطر»
هدايات، همواره به دست خدا است؛ بدون منوط بودن آن به حضور فيزيكي نبي يا امام «إنٌ علينا للهدي»
وجود نبي يا امام، تنها به منظور تعليم و آموزش است؛ اگر آموزش هائي از قبل پياده شده باشد، تمسك امتهاي خلف به آن آموزش ها، همراه با إعمال تزكيه برخود، يعني:عمل صالح، گيرايي انوار هدايات الهي و به صراط مستقيم هدايت شدن، امري حتمي است. «أنٌ الٌذين آمنوا و عملوا الصالحات يهديهم ربٌهم بايمانهم»
پس هدايات سماوي، قطع ناشدني و همواره در حال تابش است؛ ولي گيرائي آن امري است كه به خود انسان بستگي دارد.
اگر به عللي، انسان دچار كوردلي شده باشد«طبع علي قلوبهم فهم لايعلمون»، «طبع علي قلوبهم فهم لايفقهون»، ديگر براي تنفيذ انوار هدايات سماوي در دل اينگونه افراد، راهي نيست؛هرچند در حضور رسول الله، صلي اله عليه و آله، ويا امامي معصوم(ع) باشند. «إنٌك لا تهدي من أحببت، ولكنٌ الله يهدي من يشاء»
و اينكه:
و هيچ نداي آسماني تفسير«درست» و نهايي دين را در گوش آنان نمي خواند تا از بد فهمي مصون بمانند.
آيا رسيدن نداي آسماني بر بشر، منوط به حيات و حضور فيزيكي شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، نزد يكايك افراد بشر است ؟!
آيا، همه گروندگان به اسلام در زمان حيات حضرتش(ص)، به جهت حضور فيزيكي آن حضرت(ص) در مكه يا مدينه، از بد فهمي مصون مانده بودند ؟!
در زمان حيات رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، افراد يا ملت هايي كه با فاصلههاي هزاران كيلومتري از حضرتش(ص) ميزيسته اند، چگونه نداي آسماني در گوش آنان خوانده ميشد ؟!
آيا اسلام و ايمان همه ملت ها، در زمان حيات رسول الله، صلي الله عليه وآله، بوده است؟!
افراد يا ملت هايي كه پس از رحلت آن حضرت(ص) به اسلام گرويده و ايمان آورده اند، چگونه نداي آسماني در گوش آنان خوانده شده،وچگونه از بد فهمي مصون مانده اند؟!
واينكه:
راه دينداري از آن پس، جون راه زندگي، از ميان زدوخوردها ميگذرد و تكامل خود را نه از دخالتهاي كاه و بي گاه ماورائي، بل از تنازع و تعاون خردهاي وارسته زميني ميگيرد كه در نقد و فهم و تحليل، بي پروا از تقليد رستهاند.
عرض ميشود:
دينداري چيزي است و ايمان چيز ديگر.
«يمنٌون عليك أن أسلموا، قل: لا تمنٌوا عليٌ اسلامكم، بل الله يمنٌ عليكم بأن هداكم للإيمـان»
ممكن است من به عنوان دين، گوساله پرست، گاوپرست، بت پرست وحتي هستي پرست باشم.
ناگزير، هدايات الهي به هيچ وجه شامل حال من نخواهدشد؛ چون براي خداوند متعال شريك قائل شده ام، و مرتكب گناهي شده ام غير قابل بخشش؛ و در پي آن، دچار كور دلي شده ام که «طبع علي قلوبهم فهم لا يفقهون»، در نظام تشريع برآن مترتب است.
و چون انوار هدايات سماوي را ديگر به سوي دل من راهي نيست؛ از ايمان حقيقي، و ورع و تقواي حقيقي، در من مانندي، نمي تواند اثري باشد؛ و شيطان نيز كه دشمن ترين دشمن انسان ودر پي هلاكت ابدي او است،
«إنٌ الشيطان لكم عدوٌ مبين. إنٌما يأمركم بالسوء و الفحشاء و أن تقولوا علي الله ما لاتعلمون»، مرا از راه «أن تقولوا علي الله ما لاتعلمون» به شرك كشانده، و به هدف خود ميرسد؛ در نتيجه، من مانندي را با افكاري باطل سرگرم ميكند، تا به كمبود هايي چون: عدم شرح صدر، عدم تابش نور ايمان،...كه از جانب خداوند متعال است، متوجه نشوم.
«إنٌ الٌذين ارتدٌوا علي أدبارهم من بعد ما تبيٌن لهم الهدي الشيطان سوٌل لهم و أملي لهم»
ولي اگر من به عنوان دين، به نظام تشريعي گرويده باشم كه خداوند متعال آن را براي هدايت انسان، مقرر و ارسال داشته است؛ لازمه آن تحت تابش انوار هدايات سماوي قرارگرفتن من، و تنفيذ آن انوار دردل من خواهد شد؛ و با پديد آمدن ايماني در من، در جميع امور مورد هدايت خداوند متعال قرار خواهم گرفت:
«يهديهم ربٌهم بايمانهم»؛ و در نتيجه سيطره ولايت رباني، كه ولايتي است تنها بر مؤمنان به الله؛ نه مؤمنان به هر گاو، گوساله، بت، ويا مؤمن به هستي؛ نه درتاريكي وظلمتي خواهم ماند، و نه پشت درب بسته اي.
«الله وليٌ الٌذين آمنوا يخرجهم من الظلمات إلي النٌور».
پس، در هر حال هدايات، منحصر در هدايات سماوي است كه از جانب خداوند متعال است: «إنٌ هدي الله هو الهدي»؛ و اگر از طريق ديگري به مطلبي برسيم و آن را هدايت به پنداريم، يقينا از القائات شيطاني است«الشيطان سوٌل لهم و أملي لهم».
بنابراين، رحلت رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، و خاتميت، به معناي قطع هدايات سماوي نيست، بلكه گروندگان به اين نظام تشريع جديد، يعني : اسـلام، با سعي در تزكيه خود از طريق عمل صالح، به صالحين نيز خواهند پيوست.
«و الٌذين آمنوا و عملوا الصٌالحات لندخلنٌهم في الصٌالحين»
و اما اينكه:
اين رهائي از دخالت مستقيم آسمان را شيعيان از دوران غيبت مهدي آغاز ميكنند
هر ادعائي بدون شاهد، مدرك، و يا سند، تهمت و افتراء نام دارد.
چه شده كه به اين راحتي به شيعه تهمت ميزنيد ؟!
شيعه، يعني: پيرو اهل البيت(ع) و پيرو تعاليم آمده در مكتب اهل البيت(ع).
آيا،از فرمودههاي اهل البيت(ع) برادعاي خود، كه افتراء وتهمتي است، شاهدي داريد؟
توصيه و سفارش بس شديد اهل البيت (ع) به شيعيان، عدم رجوع به منبعي غير از قرآن است : «من طلب الهدي في غير القرآن أضـله الله »
«لا تتجاوز في التوحيد ما ذكره الله تعالي في كتابه فتهلك»
آنچه را كه من راجع به هدايت، و انحصار آن در سماوي بودن آن، عرض كردم، براساس تعاليم آمده در قرآن است.
و من نيز بحمد الله و منٌه يكي ازخدمتگذاران دوستان و شيعيان اهل البيت، صلوات الله عليهم اجمعين، ميباشم؛ و برداشت من از تعاليم اسلام، انحصارهدايات د ر سماوي بودن آنست.
كدام شيعه، رهائي از دخالت مستقيم آسمان را از دوران غيبت مهدي آغاز كرده است؟! اميد است شنواي پاسخ اين سئوال باشيم!
و اما اين گفته:
من نيك ميدانم كه ختم نبوت، مفهوم فاخر و فربهي است كه كلام شيعي به دليل موانع دروني، تاكنون به درستي و انصاف با آن روبرو نشده است و حق آن را چنانكه بايد نگذارده است و بر حسنات و بركات آن آگاهي نيافته و گواهي نداده است و آن قدر در تحليل و توجيه (ناكام) غيبت، تكلٌف و تفلسف ورزيده است كه از تبيين كامياب و كمياب خاتميت فرومانده است، و «سنگ خاتميت به سينه زدن» را گويي سيٌئهاي ميداندكه بايد از آن استغفار كرد.
عرض ميشود:
به اضلال الهي دچار شدن، بگونهاي كه نه هدايتي پس از آن باشد«من يضلل الله فما له من هاد»؛ و نه يادآوري و تذكري، سودبخش «و إذا ذكٌروا لا يذكرون، ؛ تنها در پي غفلت و لغزشي است!
و احتياط بسيار در گفتار و كردار لازم است، تا انسان ناخودآگاه بدينگونه چالش ها، نيفتد.
معناي خاتميت همانست كه عرض شد: رسولي از جانب خداوند متعال مامور به آوردن آخرين نظام تشريع براي بشر شده است، و چون اين نظام تشريع جاودانه است، و نظام تشريع ديگري در پي آن نخواهد بود، پس ارسال رسل به آورنده آخرين نظام تشريع، ختم شده است .
و نفس عنوان خاتميت، موضوعي نيست كه منع بهره وري ما را از تعاليم كساني كه شريك در موضوع خاتميت بوده اند، موجب گردد.
صلوات دائم امتهاي اسلامي نمازگزار بر محمٌـد، صلي الله عليه و آله، و آل او، براي رسيدن به اين حقيقت كه خاصيت وجودي محمٌـد، صلي الله عليه و آله، در زمان حيات، عينا بريكايك آل، پس از رحلت خاتم (ص) مترتب است، كافي است.
در هر نظام تشريعي، معلم آن دوره نسبت به ملت خود كه شاگردان معلم آن دوره اند، داراي يك ارزشند؛ ولي نسبت به مجموعه نظام، معلم كلاس آخر به علت واجد بودن دانش برتر، از سائرين ارجح است.
دانش آموزان و دانشجويان كلاس و ترم آخر نيز، در سطح بالاتري از دانش نسبت به سائر دانش آموزان و دانشجويان قرار دارند.
در نتيجه نسبت ارزشي معلمان به شاگردان امري است ثابت«لا نفرق بين احد من رسله»، و نفس ختـم كلاس ها، و مراحل دانش پژوهي به معلمي در آخرين كلاس، و استادي در آخرين مرحله، هيچگونه امتيازي را براي آخرين معلم و استاد نسبت به دانش آموز و دانشجو، موجب نمي شود؛ جز ارجحيت آخرين معلم در مجموعه نظام نسبت به سائر معلمين، بل نسبت به همگان.
پس ارزش وجودي آخرين معلم و برتري او بر همگان، امري بديهي است؛ ولي ارزش افراد امت، كه دانش پژوهان اين دوره آخر به حساب ميآيند، به چگونگي و ميزان بهره وري آنان از اين معلم آخر بستگي، دارد؛ و گرنه، نفس در كلاس آخر بودن، و معلم آخر بودن، امتياز آفرين براي شاگرد و معلم نيست.
آيا، به جا نبود صاحب مقاله از آن مفهوم فاخر و فربهي كه نفس خاتميت براي ايشان ايجاد كرده است، به ادعاي صرف اكتفا نكرده، و چيزي از آن ارائه مينمود، تا با تدبر در آن ديده ميشد، تشيع چه مانعي بر سر راه بهره وري از عنوان خاتميت ايجاد كرده است؟!
يقينا، اين نيز همچو عشق خودساخته عارفان(صوفيه)، با معبودي خود ساخته به نام هستي است؛ كه از آن چه بزم و طربي براي خود به راه انداخته اند!
با دور شدن از خداي حقيقي، شيطان بايد با چنين بزم و طرب هائي، عارفان را با عشق, وشما مانندهائي را با مفهوم خاتميت، سرگرم سازد، «الشيطان سوٌل لهم و أملي لهم»، تا تذكر و يادآوري ها، نتواند كارساز باشد! «فإذا ذكٌروا لا يذكرون».
اما اين گفته:
«آن كه كانون و ذاتي دين است شخص پيامبر و تعليمات گوهري او است، وباقي هرچه صبغه تاريخي و گوهري دارد، قشري و عرضي است، يعني حكمي يا واقعهاي است «ممكن» كه ميتوانست بگونهاي ديگر باشد لذا در دائره ايمانيات نمي گنجد. نزاع بر سر غيبتي كه (به اعتقاد شيعيان) در شرايط تاريخي ديگر، ميتوانست رخ ندهد و پيشوايي كه ميتوانست غيبت نكند و بماند و به اجل طبيعي درگذرد، و امام ديگري پس از او در آيد، حاصل چنداني براي دينداري ندارد و بر ضعف و قوت ايمان كسي نمي افزايد و مسلمان بودن يا نبودن گسي را رقم نمي زند».
عرض ميشود:
باشخص پيامبر، صلي الله عليه و آله، و تعليمات نخستين او، كلاس درس و دانشگاهي همراه با كتاب علمي، به نام قرآن كريم، براي تدريس در آن حوزه، تشكيل شد.
آيا، با رحلت رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، درب اين حوزه علمي الهي، بايد بسته ميشد؛ يا بنا بر ادامه تعليم و تعلٌم در آن بود؟
ولايت رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، حاكي از دانش كلي او(ص) نسبت به كتاب درسي نازله، و دانش او در چگونگي تزكيه و تعليم امت است.
آيا، در زمان حيات رسول الله(ص)، امت به بهره وري كامل از وجود معلم و كتاب درسي مربوطه، دست يافت؛ و همگان به دانش آمده در كتاب، كتابي كه «لا رطب و لا يابس إلاٌ في كتاب مبين» و« تبيانا لكل شئ» است، و فارغ التحصيل شدن نسبت به آموزش آن، موفق گرديدند ؟!
لزوم معلم همراه با كتاب علمي، آنهم كتابي كه «فيه تبيان كل شئ» است، امري است اجتناب ناپذير؛ پس هيچگاه بشراز وجود معلم نسبت به قرآن كريم، بي نياز نخواهدشد.
به همين دليل است معرفي رسول اللهٌ,، صلي الله عليه و آله، معلم پس از خود را با عبارت:
«من كنت مولا فهذا علي مولاه»، با خطاب به امت در خطبه غدير، و سائر فرمودههاي او(ص) در لزوم تمسك به اهل البيت(ع)، به عنوان معلمان انحصاري قرآن، فرموده هايي كه علاوه بركتب روايي شيعه، كتب روايي اهل سنت نيز مملو است از آن؛ همچون فرموده اش(ص) در خطبه غدير:
«و أوقفه يوم غدير خم فأعلم الناس:«أنٌه مولي كل مؤمن و مؤمنة» و قال له :«أنت منٌي وأنا منك»، و قال له :«تقاتل علي التأويل كما قاتلت علي التنزيل»، و قال له: «أنت منٌي بمنزلة هرون من موسي»، و قال له:«أنا سلم لمن سالمت و حرب لمن حاربت»،و قال له :«أنت العروة الوثقي»، و قال له:«أنت تبيٌن لهم ما اشتبه عليهم بعدي»، وقال له:«أنت إمام كل مؤمن و مؤمنة و وليٌ كل مؤمن و مؤمنة بعدي»
ويا:«عليٌ باب علمي و مبيٌن لأمٌتي ما اختلف فيه من بعدي»
ويا:«ياعلي! أنت وارث علمي و المبيٌن لأمٌتي ما أرسلت به»
ويا :«من طلب الهدي من غيرهم فقد كذٌبني»
آيا، پذيرش توصيهها و اوامر آنكس كه كانون و ذاتي دين است، ضروري است، يا نه؟
آنكس كه فرستنده رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، و منزل قرآن كريم است، لازمه پياده شدن نظام تشريع را، پذيرش آوردههاي پيام آور خود، و اجتناب از آنچه كه او نهي مي كند، اعلام داشته است:
«وما آتاكم الرسول فخذوه و مانهاكم عنه فانتهوا»
1- بر پيام آور خود امر فرموده است معرفي معلم كتاب، و معرفي آنكس را كه، پس از او، ادامه تزكيه و تعليم، همراه با ولايتي كلي بر بشر، با او است.
2- «يا أيٌها الرٌسول بلٌغ ما أنزل إليك من ربٌك و إن لم تفعل فما بلغت رسالته ...»
و در اهميت موضوع همين بس، كه در صورت عدم اجراء اين امر، نبوت و رسالت شخصيتي چون رسول اكرم، صلي الله عليه و آله، كأن لم يكن، وغير انجام شده به حساب ميآمد.
اگر احيانا در صدور اين آيه شريفه در مورد امامت علي، عليه السلام، شك داريد؛ به كتاب شريف الغدير ج2-ص214، مراجعه شود تا ناظر بر اين داستان, از زبان اهل سنت باشيد.
البته، مقام نبي اكرم(ص) والاتر از آن است كه به فرمان خداوند متعال بي اعتناء باشد؛ ولي براي تفهيم اهميت موضوع به امت، و اينكه تكميل رسالت به امامت، و ادامه تزكيه و تعليم، به انجام اين وظيفه، يعني: تعيين امام و معرفي امامت بستگي دارد، خداوند متعال بدينگونه با شدت پيامبر(ص) خود را مورد خطاب قرار داده است!
پس، آغازرسالت، كه گشودن دار العلم و دانشگاهي الهي است براي آموزش بشريت، بدينگونه نيست كه در وجود نبي اكرم،صلي الله عليه و آله،خلاصه شده باشد، تا لازمه رحلت حضرتش(ص)، بسته شدن درب اين دار العلم علمي الهي بر روي جهانيان باشد!
خيـــر! با تعيين و معرفي معلمان انحصاري اين دارالعلوم الهي، باز بودن آن براي هميشه، اعلام گرديده ست،چون: «ما إن تمسٌكتم بهما لن تضلوا أبدا»
(با تمسك به قرآن كريم + اهل البيت(ع)، هـرگز گمراه نخواهيد شد)؛ به ‹هـرگز›، دقت شود.
و اما اينكه:
نزاع بر سر غيبتي كه (به اعتقاد شيعيان) در شرايط تاريخي ديگر، ميتوانست رخ ندهد و پيشوايي كه ميتوانست غيبت نكند و بماند و به اجل طبيعي درگذرد، و امام ديگري پس از او در آيد، حاصل چنداني براي دينداري ندارد و بر ضعف و قوت ايمان كسي نمي افزايد و مسلمان بودن يا نبودن گسي را رقم نمي زند»
عرض ميشود:
ابتداء بايد ديد دينداري چيست، و سپس در پي شناخت عوامل ايجاد، تخريب، تقويت، و تضعيف كننده دين برآمد.
دينداري، يعني: خداشناسي؛ حال چه اين خدا، گاو، گوساله، بت، هستي، و مانند آن باشد؛ وچه خداوندي بنام الله تبيين شده در قرآن كريم.
ارسال رسل و انزال كتب براي معرفي و شناساندن خداي حقيقي به انسان ها، از راه تزكيه و تعليم، بوده است.
در پي خدا بودن، امري است در سرشت انسان ها؛ كه با عدم دسترسي به تعاليم انبياء الهي، بشربراي خود وبراساس فرهنگي كه درآن رشد يافته، خداياني ميساخته است.
در فرهنگ ايران باستان،هستي به عنوان خدا انتخاب شده بوده است؛كه خدائي هستي در گروهي از ملت ايران به نام عارف(صوفي)، به قوت خود باقي است.
انبياء و رسل بشر را به سوي خداي حقيقي، از راه تزكيه و تعليم، هدايت مينمودند؛ ولي ميبينيم با اندك فاصلهاي بين مردم و معلم دين، رفتن به سوي خدايان ساختگي، وعقايد نياكاني، بر پي گيري صراط مستقيم و عبوديت خداي حقيقي، ترجيح داده ميشده است ! به داستان موسي(ع)، توجه كنيد:
«و واعدنا موسي ثلاثين ليلة و أتممناها بعشر فتمٌ ميقات ربٌه أربعين ليلة»
ده روز از قرار برگشت موسي(ع)به قومش، تاخير شد؛ و طي آن:
«ثم انخذوا العجل من بعد ما جائتهم بينات»
با اينكه خداشناسي براي آنان تبيين شده بود«بعد ما جائتهم البيٌنات»، ده روز تاخير در برگشت موسي(ع)، قوم او به گوساله پرستي سوق داده شدند:
«اتخذوا عجلا جسدا له خوار».
پس، نظارت و سرپرستي دائم معلمان الهي بر مردم، وتربيت مردم بر لزوم تمسك دائم به اين معلمان، امري قطعي است؛ چون در غير اين صورت، برگشت ملتها از پرستش خداي حقيقي به معبودهاي ساختگي، و به چاله شرك افتادنشان، اجتناب ناپذير خواهد شد.
دينداري و خداپرستي در سرشت انسانها است؛ ولي بسيار بسيار اندكند آناني كه به پرستش خداي حقيقي، نائل ميگردند. «و ما يؤمن اكثرهم بالله إلاٌ و هم مشركون»
بيشتر آناني كه به سراغ خداي حقيقي ميروند، سر از شرك در ميآورند، و حال آنكه اكثر مردم در بي راهه به سر برده و درپي خداي غيرحقيقي ميباشند.
حال، چگونه بايد فاصله بين نبي(ص)، پس از رحلتش، و مردم، و نظارت بر عقائد مردم، و حفظ آنان از گرايش به سوي فرهنگهاي نياكاني خود، «أفإن مات او قتل انقلبتم علي اعقابكم ؟!»، حفظ شود؟
وجود معلمان انحصاري قرآن، منتخب از جانب خداوند متعال، معرفي شده توسط اين آخرين پيام آور الهي؛ وادامه تزكيه، كه يكي از موارد آن تربيت امت به لزوم تمسٌك به معلمين منتخب؛ و تعلٌم و فراگيري علوم قرآني از آنان، كه تنها منبع موثق مي باشند، تا از هرگونه كجي واعوجاج، مصون مانند.
آيا همه امت در زمان حيات رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، موفق به بهره وري كامل و فراگيري علوم قرآني از او(ص) شدند؟!
همواره آنانيكه هدايت شده و از معلمان الهي بهره ور ميشدند، و به خداي حقيقي ايمان آورده، و سپاسگزار نعمتهاي الهي بودند، اندك بودهاند.
«مايؤمن اكثرهم بالله إلاٌ و هم مشركون»،«ما آمن معه إلا قليل»، «إلاٌ الٌذين آمنوا
وعملوا الصالحات و قليل ماهم»، «ثمٌ توليٌتم إلاٌ قليلا منكم و أنتم معرضون»، «بل لعنهم الله بكفرهم فقليلا مايؤمنون»،«ولكن لعنهم الله بكفرهم فلا يؤمنون إلاٌ قليلا»، «و لا تتٌبعوا من دونه أولياء قليلا ما تذكٌرون»،«وجعلنا لكم فيها معايش و قليلا ما تشكرون»، «أ إله مع الله قليلا ما تذكٌرون»،
از اينگونه آيات كه بر اندك بودن مؤمنان، صالحان، گيرندگان حقايق،... دلالت دارد بسيار است؛ و اكثريت همواره با مشركان، غيرخدا پرستان، غير مؤمنين، غير صالحين، وغير شاكرين، بوده و هست.
«نزاع بر سر غيبتي كه (به اعتقاد شيعيان) در شرايط تاريخي ديگر.....»
نزاع بر سر غيبت، يعني چه ؟ نزاع بين كي و با كي ؟
غيبت كه امري است متفق عليه، و بسياري از علماء اهل سنت برآن اذعان و اعتراف دارند.
آيا نظام تشريعي كه شخص رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، به عنوان ختم نظامهاي تشريع، آورنده آن بود، نمي توانست از همان ابتداء خلقت آورده شده و پياده شود؛ و نيازي به اين تاخير نداشته باشد ؟!
تفاوت گيرائي بشر در ادوار مختلفه، و كلاس در س بودن زندگي براي او، و ارتقاء او به سطحي بالاتر نسبت به گذشتگان، امري است كاملا مشهود.
آيا ميتوان گفت: دانش آموزي با ورود به دبستان، چرا او را دركلاس آخر دبستان، دبيرستان، و يا دانشگاه، جاي ندهيم؛ تا اين چنين تاخيري چندين سالهاي را براي رسيدن او به درجات عاليه دانش، موجب نشده باشيم؟!
گذران مراحلي، با كسب دانش در آن مراحل، براي حصول قابليت درك مطالب مطروحه در مراحل بالاتر، امري است اجتناب ناپذير.
اين برنامه نظام تكوين است؛ و لازمه ارتقاء بشر به مراحلي برتر، گذران مراحلي مادون است، تا قابليت ارتقاء به مراحلي برتر، در او پديدآيد؛ و بدون گذران مراحل مادون، ارتقاء به مراحلي برتر، غير ممكن است.
آيا از استاد دانشگاه براي ارتقاء دانش آموز به مرحله دانشجويي، بدون گذراندن مراحل دانش آموزي، كاري ساخته است ؟!
عامل تاخير دست يابي بشر به تمدن روز، و سفر او به كرات آسماني، چه بوده است؟
گذران مراحلي، يكي پس از ديگري، براي به وجود آمدن قابليت و استعداد گيرائي دانش و تمدن روز در او .
آيا، ختم رسل(ص)، ميتوانست در يك مرحله عرب باديه نشين زمان نزول وحي را به بشر متمدن امروزي، ارتقاء دهد ؟!
آيا بينش عرب زمان شروع رسالت، با بينش عرب زمان رحلت رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، در يك سطح بود ؟!
آيا، آياتي كه در حدود پايان عمر آن حضرت تبيين ميشد، در آغاز امر سالت قابل تبيين بود؟!
لازمه پياده شدن نظام تشريع به طور تام و تمام، رسيدن بشر به قابليت و استعدادي است پذيراي تمام رموز نظام؛ كه بدون ارتقاء اوبه اين سطح، طرح مسائل نوين نظام تشريع، عكس العمل شديد بشررا در مقابل طرح مسائل نظام، موجب شده؛ و ايجاد موانعي هرچه بيشتر را در مقابل پياده شدن يكايك مسائل مطروحه در نظام را، در پي خواهد داشت.
آيا، مدلول آيات شريفهاي چون:
«سخٌر لكم مافي السماوات و ما في الارض جميعا منه؛ إنٌ في ذلك لآيات لقوم يتفكٌرون»، «الله الٌذي رفع السماوات بغير عمد ترونها»
«والسماء بنيناها بأيد و إنٌا لموسعون»
در زمان نزول آيات شريفه، قابل تبيين و پياده شدن بود ؟!
آيا، بر تاخير تبيين آن به زمان حاضر، اعتراضي وارد است ؟!
بشر زمان نزول آيه شريفه، نمي توانست گيراي حقايق مدلول اين آيات شريفه باشد.
ولي، پس از گذران مراحلي طي بيش از هزار سال، قابليت و استعداد درك مدلول آيات شريفه ياد شده، در او پديد آمده است.
و چه نكات بي شمار ديگري راجع به عالم هستي و رموز آن در قرآن كريمي كه
«ما فرطٌنا في الكتاب من شئ»، وجود دارد كه بوئي از آن حتي به مشام بشر متمدن امروزي، هنوز نرسيده است؛ و لازمه آن تبييناتي است غير قابل پياده شدن مگر توسط شخصي به همان خصلت و ويژگيهاي رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، و دانا به علوم ورموز آمده در قرآن كريم همچون دانائي حضرتش(ص)، و ارتقاء بشر به سطح دانايي لازم.
آيا، برتاخير تبيين همه مدلولات آيات شريفه قرآن، اعتراضي وارد است.
آيا، بر وجود شخصي مبيٌن و معلم تمام علوم آمده در قرآن كريمي كه «لا رطب و لا يابس إلاٌ في كتاب مبين» در زمان مناسب و معين، اعتراضي وارد است؟!
وجود چنين شخصي، صلوات الله عليه، موجب تماميت رسالت و خاتميت است؛ كه بدون او، و بدون تبيين علوم قرآني توسط او، رسالت و خاتميت نمي تواند به تماميت و كمال توصيف شود؛ و اكمالي را كه خداوند متعال به دين و نظام تشريع نسبت داده است:
«اليوم أكملت لكم دينكم و أتممت عليكم نعمتي» كمالي است بالقوة، و به فعل در آمدن آن منوط به پياده شدن كامل اين نظام است.
لازمه ختم نظامها بودن اين نظام تشريع، و لازمه «لا يأتيه الباطل بين يديه و لا من خلفه» بودن آن، تام و تمام بودن آنست؛ بگونهاي كه اگر بشر به هرنوع تمدني كه ممكن است به مخيله بشر كنوني خطور نكند، برسد؛ اين نظام تشريع، به شرط به صورت كامل پياده شدنش، كافي براي اداره آن تمدن باشد.
و اما اين گفته:
نزاع بر سر غيبتي(كه به اعتقاد شيعيان) در شرايط تاريخي ديگر، ميتوانست رخ ندهد و پيشوايي كه ميتوانست غيبت نكند و بماند و به اجل طبيعي درگذرد، و امام ديگري پس از او درآيد، حاصل چنداني براي دينداري ندارد و بر ضعف و قوت ايمان كسي نمي افزايد و مسلمان بودن يا نبودن كسي را رقم نمي زند.
عرض ميشود:
مطالبي كه به عقائد شيعه نسبت داده ميشود، از كجا آمده است؟
آيا عقائدي است مقتبس از مكتب اهل البيت(ع) ؟!
پس، چرا نمونهاي از آن را، به عنوان صدق گفتار خود، بازگو نكردهايد؟!
اين سخن مانند اين است كه گفته شود:
خداوند متعال ميتوانست، بدون آفرينش اين جهان، همه موجودات را در عالم پس از اين جهان، اسكان دهد؛ پس جهان آفرينشي كه ميتوانست نباشد؛ و زندگي و مرگي را انسان در آن تجربه نكند، نمي تواند برفلاح يا عدم فلاح، ورستگاري يا عدم رستگاري موجودي در دار آخرت، رقم بزند.
بلي، هركاري از خداوند متعال ساخته است«إنٌه علي كل شئ قدير»،ولي براي آگاهي از افعال ربوبي، بايد بركرسي الوهيت نشست تا بتوان از رموز كار او و از رموز آفرينش، با خبر شد.
يكي از علتهاي آن ممكن است عدم توان بشر بر سكني گزيدن در عالم آخرت، بدون تجربه زندگي دراين دنيا باشد.
در اسلام و مكتب تشيع، همانگونه كه در شناخت ذات، راهي نيست؛ در شناخت افعال او نيز، راهي نيست.
«ولم تجعل للخلق طريقا الي معرفتك إلاٌ بالعجز عن معرفتك»
ولي، براي گروهي به نام عارف(صوفي)،كه از فرهنگ قديم ايران ارث ميبرند، چون خدا شدن امكان پذير است«صحٌ له التـألٌه»؛اينگونه شناختها نيز، با فناء در ذات، امكان پذير ميشود.
در مكتب تشيع، وجود فيزيكي يكايك ائمه اهل البيت(ع)، بمنزله همان وجود فيزيكي رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، در حال حيات بود:
«الأئمة بمنزلة رسول الله(ص)، إلاٌ انهم ليسوا بأنبياء»
پس، همان خاصيت فيزيكي كه وجود شخص رسول الله(ص)، براي امت اسلامي داشت؛ در پي اين امر خداوند متعال:«قل لا أسألكم عليه أجرا إلاٌ المودٌة في القربي»، ائمه اهل البيت(ع)، نيز براي شيعيان و دوستان خود داشتند؛ وبا فقدان رسول الله(ص)، شيعه خود را يتيم و بي سرپرست، نيافت. «أنا و عليٌ أبوا هذه الأمة».
پس، شيعه همواره معادني براي فراگيري علوم قرآني، در اختيار داشت؛ و آن شعف و سروري را كه براي هر مؤمن به خدايي از رسيدن به خدمت رسول لله(ص)، حاصل ميشد؛ براي شيعه نيز از خدمت امامان معصوم(ع) رسيدن، حاصل ميشد، كه تقويت ايمان، و آگاهي بيشتر به علوم و معارف دين را نيز براي آنان، در پي داشت.
و باوجود سياست خلفاء جور بر منع رفت و آمد به خدمت حضرات(ع)، شيعيان آشنا به علوم و معارف اهل البيت(ع) خود را به هر وسيله به خدمتشان ميرساندند.
پس وجود فيزيكي يكايك ائمه اهل البيت(ع)، عاملي بود در رشد دانش وحياني شيعيان، و شناخت بهتر خداوند متعال؛ و در نتيجه تقويت ايمان در آنان.
و چون امامت، اتمام دين و اكمال نظام تشريع است«فإن لم تفعل فما بلٌغت رسالته»، پس امري است ذاتي دين؛ نه عرضي و تاريخي نسبت به آن.
رحلت رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، اگر به معناي قطع همه چيز انگاشته شود، لازمه آن فرو رفتن در ظلمت و تاريكيها است؛ چون فردي كه تبيين آيات قرآني به وجود فيزيكي او بستگي داشت، ديگر وجود ندارد.
و نسبت آنچه كه آن حضرت(ص) در زمان حيات توانست به تبيين آن جهت عرب جاهليت به پردازد، به آنچه قرآن كريم حاوي آنست، همچون نسبت قطره به دريا است.
ولي نزد شيعه و بر اساس احاديثي بسيار، متفق عليه بين سنٌي و شيعه، و از آنها حديث المنـزلـة: «يا علي! أنت منٌي بمنـزلة هارون من موسي إلاٌ أنٌه لا نبيٌ بعدي»، شخص رسول الله،(ص)، تبيين علوم وحياني را پس از خود به علي(ع)، واگذار نمود.
«يا علي! أنت الذي تبيـٌن لأمٌتي ما يختلفون فيه من بعدي، و تقوم فيهم مقامي، قولك قولي، و أمرك أمري، وطاعتك طاعتي، و طاعتي طاعة الله...»
پس، شيعه با رحلت رسول الله(ص)،همه چيز را از دست نداد، بلكه با پذيرش و لايت علي و اولاد علي،عليهم السلام، همچنان به راه پيامبر خدا(ص) در پذيرش تزكيه و تعليم از اهل البيت(ع)،ادامه داد؛ و مسائلي كه براي شيعه آشنا به علوم و معارف اهل البيت(ع) درامر توحيد و خدا شناسي روشن شده است، ديگران را از آن بهرهاي نيست.
به جهت بي بهره بودن از معارف اسلامي، و عدم درك تام و تمام بودن آن، و عدم درك اهميت آنست، كه افرادي حتي با عنوان آيت اللهي، به فرهنگ بيگانگان، و مطالب آمده در كتاب هائي چون اثولوجيـا، كه احيـاء فرهنگ قديم ايراني است، پناه برده؛ و به احياء مطالب فرهنگ بيگانگان، با عباراتي چون:
«نحن قد إحيينا رسوم المتقدمين» افتخار ميكنند؛ و براي پرده پوشي بر عدم درك و بينش خود از معارف اسلامي، ميگويند:
«ما در قرن سوم و چهارم دانشمندان ورزيده و زبردستي داشته ايم كه توانستهاند انديشههاي يوناني و احيانا هندي و ايران باستان را ترجمه كنند.آنان در واقع در هرگوشهاي از دنيا انديشه تابناكي يافتند به جهان اسلام آوردند...»
ويا:
«فرهنگ اسلامي مانند يك سلول زنده رشدكرده و فرهنگهاي ديگر را از يوناني و هندي و ايراني در خود جذب كرد و به صورت موجودي جديد با چهره و سيمائي مخصوص به خود ظهور و بروز كرد»
اگر اسلام به آنچه كه از فرهنگهاي بيگانه جذب كرده، نيازمند بوده است؛ اين نيازناقض ادعاي تام و كامل بودن اسلام است.
در صورت عدم نياز، جاذبيتي از جانب اسلام نمي توانسته نسبت به آن مسائل وجود داشته باشد؛ بلكه نمايانگر سعي ديگراني است در واردنمودن فرهنگ بيگانگان، براي سرگرم نگهداشتن ملت اسلامي با مسائلي غير اسلامي، و ايجاد غفلت در آنان نسبت به آوردههاي اسلام.
نفس باور به وجود ولي و امامي موجود، ناظر برهمه امور، همچون حضور رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، در زمان حيات، عاملي است در زنده نگه داشتن علوم و معارف اسلامي تبيين شده در مكتب اهل البيت(ع)، و بازدارنده امت از بازگشت به سوي عقائد نياکان, وچيزهائي همچون عجل سامري، و مانند آن؛ با اين امتياز كه امت صدر اسلام را از ولايت، خصيصهاي كه از ويژگيهاي اهل البيت(ع) بوده، و غير قابل دسترس براي ديگران، برداشتي نبود؛ ولي اكنون، بر اثر رشد افكار، برداشت آن، به مراتب بهتر از گذشتگان است؛ و با اين بينش، نظارت ولي برهمه امور و برهمگان، و بر رفتار و كردارها، امري است محقق.
و اما اين گفته:
«...قلم را به پرسشي ديگر ميكشاند و آن سمت و صفت "پاسداران علم پيامبر و مستحفظان شريعت" است كه شما به پيشوايان شيعه داده ايد و امامت را بدين سب واجب شمرده ايد و امام غائب را نيز"مستحفظ معاصر" خوانده ايد و همين را حجت حضور غائبانه او دانسته ايد. در جلالت شأن آن بزرگواران سخني و نزاعي نيست. اما نگاه جستجوگر تاريخ- تجربي- پسيني صادقانه ميخواهد ببيند كه جدٌ وجهد اين "حافظان" چه چيز را براي شيعيان محفوظ نگهداشته است كه غير شيعيان از آن محروم مانده اند؟»
عرض ميشود:
هيچگاه شيعه در امر تشريع، امري كه خاص خداوند متعال است، دخالت نكرده، چون شركي است محرز، و«ذنب لايغفر» گناهي نابخشودني؛ وخودسرانه براي كسي منصب و مقامي در نظام تشريع، نتراشيده است.
و اگر براي امامان معصوم خود، عليهم السلام، مقام ومنزلتي قائل است، همان مقام و منزلتي است كه خداوند متعال تعيين فرموده و فرستاده خود را، صلي الله عليه و آله، امر به ابلاغ آن به امت نموده است.
لازمه بحث و گفتوگويي صحيح پيرامون هرموضوعي، ابتدا شناخت صحيح آن موضوع است.
حداقل تاثير ويژگي و خصيصه «در جلالت شأن آن بزرگواران سخني و نزاعي نيست» كه باور شما است، بايد دور بودن واجدان آن خصيصه، از خلاف واقع و حقيقت سخن گفتن باشد.
تنها به سراغ فرمودهاي از مولايمان ثامن الحجج علي بن موسي الرضا، عليه السلام، در تعريف و تبيين امامت، ميرويم؛ كسي كه در جلالت شأن ايشان، قاعدتا نبايد نزد شما، نزاعي باشد:
«...إنٌ الله عزٌ و جلٌ لم يقبض نبيٌه، صلي الله عليه و آله، حتٌي أكمل له الدين و أنزل عليه القرآن فيه تبيان كل شئ، بيٌن فيه الحلال و الحرام، و الحدود و الاحكام، و جميع ما يحتاج اليه الناس كمٌلا، فقال عزٌ و جل:«ما فرٌطنا في الكتاب من شئ»، و أنزل في حجة الوداع و هي آخر عمره،صلٌي الله عليه و آله، «اليوم أكملت لكم دينكم و أتممت عليكم نعمتي و رضيت لكم الاسلام دينا»، و أمر الإمامة من تمام الدين، و لم يمض(ص) حتٌي بيٌن لأمٌته معالم دينه و أوضح لهم سبيله، و تركهم علي قصد الحق، و أقام لهم عليٌـا،عليه السلام، علما و إماما، و ماترك شيئا يحتاج اليه الأمٌـة إلا بيٌنه، فمن زعم أنٌ الله عزٌ و جلٌ لم يكمٌل دينه فقد ردٌ كتاب الله فهو كافر به. هل تعرفون قدر الإمامة و محلها من الأمة فيجوز فيها اختيارهم؟!
إنٌ الإمامة أجلٌ قدرا و أعظم شأنا و أعلا مكانا و أمنع جانبا و أبعد غورا من أن يبلغها الناس بعقولهم، أو ينالونها بآرائهم، أو يقيموا إماما باختيارهم، إنٌ الإمامة خصٌِ الله عزٌ و جلٌ بها ابراهيم الخليل(ع) بعد النبوٌة والخلٌة مرتبة ثالثة، و فضيلة شرٌفه بها و أشاد بها ذكره، فقال:‹إنٌي جاعلك للناس إماما›، فقال الخليل(ع) سرورا بها:‹و من ذريٌتي›، قال الله تبارك و تعالي:‹لا ينال عهدي الظالمين›. فأبطلت هذه الآية إمامة كل ظالم إلي يوم القيامة وصارت في الصفوة، ثمٌ أكرمه الله تعالي بأن جعلها في ذريته أهل الصفوة و الطهارة فقال:‹و وهبنا له إسحاق و يعقوب نافلة و كلاٌ جعلنا صالحين. وجعلناهم أئمٌة يهدون بأمرنا و أوحينا إليهم فعل الخيرات و إقام الصلوة و إيتاء الزكاة و كانوا لنا عابدين›.
فلم تزل في ذريٌته يرثها بعض عن بعض قرنا فقرنا حتٌي ورٌثها الله تعالي النبيٌ، صلي الله عليه و آله، فقال جلٌ و تعالي: ‹إنٌ أولي الناس بإبراهيم للٌذين اتٌبعوه و هذا النبيٌ و الٌذين آمنوا والله وليٌ المؤمنين»فكانت له خاصٌة فقلٌدها عليٌا(ع) بأمر الله تعالي علي رسم فرض الله، فصارت في ذريته الأصفياء الٌذين آتاهم الله العلم و الايمان، بقوله تعالي: «وقال الٌذين أوتوا العلم و الإيمان لقد لبثتم في كتاب الله إلي يوم البعث»
فهي في ولد علي، عليه السلام، خاصٌة إلي يوك القيامة؛ إذ لا نبيٌ بعد محمٌٌد، صلي الله عليه و آله، فمن أين يختار هؤلاء الجهٌال.
إنٌ الإمامة هي منزلة الأنبياء، و إرث الأوصياء، إنٌ الإمامة خلافة الله و خلافة الرسول، صلي الله عليه و آله، و مقام أمير امؤمنين(ع) و ميراث الحسن و الحسين، عليهما السلام.
إنٌ الإمامة زمام الدين، و نظام المسلمين، و صلاح الدنيا و عزٌ المؤمنين، إنٌ الإمامة أسٌ الإسلام النامي، و فرعه السامي، بالإمام تمام الصلاة و الزكاة و الصيام و الحجٌ و الجهاد، و توفير الفئ و الصدقات، و إمضاء الحدود و الأحكام، و منع الثغور و الأطراف.
الإمام يحلٌ حلال الله، و يحرٌم حرام الله، و يقيم حدود الله، و يذبٌ عن دين الله، و يدعوا إلي سبيل ربٌه بالحكمة، و الموعظة الحسنة، و الحجٌة البالغة، الإمام كالشمس الطالعة المجلٌلة بنورها للعالم و هي في الأفق بحيث لا تنالها الأيدي و الأبصار.
الإمام البدر المنير، و السراج الزاهر، و النور الساطع، و النجم الهادي في غياهب الدجي، و اجواز البلدان و القفار، و لجج البحار، الإمام الماء العذب علي الظماء،
و الدلٌ علي الهدي، والمنجي من الرٌدي، الامام النار علي اليفاع، الحار لمن اصطلي به، والدليل في المهالك، من فارقه فهالك، الإمام السحاب الماطر، و الغيث الهاطل،
و الشمس المضيئة، و السماء الظليلة، و الأرض البسيطة، و العين الغرٌيزة، والغدير و الروضة.
الإمام الأنيس الرفيق، و الوالد الشفيق، والأخ الشقيق، و الأمٌ البرٌة بالولد الصغير،
و مفزع العباد في الداهية النآد، الإمام أمين الله في خلقه، و حجته علي عباده، و خليفته في بلاده، و الداعي إلي الله، والذابٌ عن حرم الله.
الإمام المطهٌر من الذنوب و المبرٌا من العيوب، المخصوص بالعلم، الموسوم بالحلم، نظام الدٌين، و عزٌ المسلمين و غيظ المنافقين، و بوار الكافرين.
الإمام واحد دهره، لايدانيه أحد، و لايعادله عالم، و لايوجد منه بدل و لا له مثل و نظير، مخصوص بالفضل كلٌه من غير طلب منه له و لا اكتساب، بل اختصاص من المفضٌل الوهٌاب.
فمن ذا الٌذي يبلغ معرفة الإمام، أو يمكنه اختياره، هيهات هيهات، ضلٌت العقول، و تاهت الحلوم، و حارت الألباب، و خسئت العيون، و تصاغرت العظماء، وتحيٌرت الحكماء، و تقاصرت الحلماء، و حصرت الخطباء، وجهلت الألبٌاء، و كلٌت الشعراء، و عجزت الأدباء، و عيبت البلغاء، عن وصف شأن من شأنه، أو فضيلة من فضائله، و أقرٌت بالعجز و التقصير، و كيف يوصف بكلٌه، أو ينعت بكنهه، أو يفهم شئ من أمره، أو يوجد من يقوم مقامه و يغني غناه، لا كيف و أنٌي؟ و هو بحيث النجم من يد المتناولين، و وصف الواصفين، فأين الاختيار من هذا؟ و أين العقول عن هذا؟
و أين يوجد مثل هذا ؟!
أ تظنٌون أنٌ ذلك يوجد في غير آل الرسول محمٌد،صلي الله عليه و آله، كذبتهم والله أنفسهم، و منٌتهم الأباطيل، فارتقوا مرتقا صعبا دحضا، تزلٌ عنه إلي الحضيض أقدامهم، راموا إقامة الإمام بعقول حائزة بائرة ناقصة، و آراء مضلٌة، فلم يزدادوا منه إلاٌ بعدا، قاتلهم الله أني يؤفكون، و لقد رامو صعبا، و قالوا إفكا، و ضلٌوا ضلالا بعيدا، و وقعوا في الحيرة، إذ تركوا الإمام عن بصيرة، و زيٌن لهم الشيطان أعمالهم فصدٌهم عن السبيل وكانوا مستبصرين.
رغبوا عن اختيار الله و اختيار رسول الله، صلي الله عليه و آله، و أهل بيته إلي اختيارهم و القرآن يناديهم: «و ربٌك يخلق ما يشاء و يختار ما كان لهم الخيرة سبحان الله و نعالي عما يشركون». وقال عزٌ و جلٌ:«وما كان لمؤمن و لا مؤمنة إذا قضي الله و رسوله أمرا أن يكون لهم الخيرة من أمرهم»، وقال:«ما لكم كيف تحكمون. أم لكم كتاب فيه تدرسون.إنٌ لكم فيه لما تخيٌرون. أم لكم أيمان علينا بالغة إلي يوم القيامة إنٌ لكم لما تحكمون. سلهم أيٌهم بذلك زعيم. أم لهم شركاء فليأتوا بشركائهم إن كانوا صادقين». و قال عزٌ و جلٌ:«أفلا يتدبٌرون القرآن أم علي قلوب أقفالها»، «أم طبع الله علي قلوبهم فهم لا يفقهون»، «أم قالو سمعنا و هم لا يسمعون . إنٌ شرٌ الدواب عند الله الصمٌ البكم الٌذين لا يعقلون. و لو علم الله فيهم خيرا لأسمعهم و لو أسمعهم لتولٌوا و هم معرضون»،أم« قالوا سمعنا و عصينا»، «بل هو فضل الله يؤتيه من يشاء و الله ذوالفضل العظيم».
فكيف لهم باختيار الإمام ؟! الإمام عالم لا يجهل، و راع لا ينكل، معدن القدس و الطهارة، و النسك و الزهادة، و العلم و العبادة، مخصوص بدعوة الرسول، صلي الله عليه و آله، و نسل المطهرٌة البتول، لا مغمز فيه في نسب، و لا يدانيه ذوحسب، في البيت من قريش و الذروة من هاشم، و العترة من الرٌسول،صلي الله عليه و آله، و الرٌضا من الله عزٌ و جلٌ، شرف الأشراف، و الفرع من عبد مناف، نامي العلم، كامل الحلم، مضطلع بالإمامة، عالم بالسياسة، مفروض الطاعة، قائم بأمر الله عزٌ و جلٌ، ناصح لعباد الله، حافظ لدين الله.
إنٌ الأنبياء و الأئمة، صلوات الله عليهم، يوفٌقهم الله و يؤتيهم من مخزون علمه و حكمه ما لا يؤتيه غيرهم، فيكون علمهم فوق علم أهل الزمان في قوله تعالي: «أفمن يهدي إلي الحقٌ أحقٌ أن يتٌبع أمٌن لا يهدٌي إلاٌ أن يهدي، فما لكم كيف تحكمون»، و قوله تعالي:
« و من يؤت الحكمة فد أوتي خيرا كثيرا»، و قوله في طالوت:«إنٌ الله اصطفاه عليكم و زاده بسطة في العلم و الجسم و الله يؤتي ملكه من يشاء، و الله واسع عليم»، و قال لنبيه،صلي الله عليه و آله:«أنزل عليك الكتاب و الحكمة و علٌمك ما لم تكن تعلم، و كان فضل الله عليك عظيما» و قال في الأئمة من اهل بيت نبيٌه و عترته و ذريٌته، صلوات الله عليهم: «أم يحسدون الناس علي ما آتاهم الله من فضله فقد آتينا آل إبراهيم الكتاب و الحكمة و آتيناهم ملكا عظيما. فمنهم من آمن و منهم من صدٌ عنه وكفي بجهنٌم سعيرا»
و إنٌ العبد إذا اختاره الله عزٌ و جلٌ لأمور عباده، شرح صدره لذلك، و أودع قلبه ينابيع الحكمة، و ألهمه العلم إلهاما، فلم يعي بعده بجواب، و لا يحيرفيه عن الصواب، فهو معصوم مؤيٌد موفٌق مسدٌد، قد أمن من الخطايا و الزلل و العثار، يخصٌه الله بذلك ليكون حجته علي عباده، و شاهده علي خلقه، و ذلك فضل الله يؤتيه من يشاء و الله ذوالفضل العظيم.
فهل يقدرون علي مثل هذا فيختارونه أو يكون مختارهم بهذه الصفة فيقدٌمونه، تعدٌوا – وبيت الله – الحقٌ و نبذوا كتاب الله وراء ظهورهم كأنٌهم لا يعلمون، و في كتاب الله الهدي و الشفاء، فنبذوه و اتٌبعوا أهوائهم، فذمٌهم الله و مقٌتهم و أتعسهم فقال جلٌ و تعالي:«و من أضلٌ ممٌن اتٌبع هواه بغير هدي من الله إنٌ الله لا يهدي القوم الظالمين»، وقال:«فتعسا لهم و أضلٌ أعمالهم»و قال:«وكبر مقتا عند الله و عند الٌذين آمنوا كذلك يطبع الله علي كل قلب متكبٌر جبٌار»،و صلٌي الله علي النبيٌ محمٌد و آله و سلٌم تسليما كثيرا»
(خداوند متعال نبي خود،صلي الله عليه وآله،را به سوي خود فرا نخواندمگر پس از اكمال دين و نزول قرآن كه در آن بيان همه چيز است ؛و در آن تبيين فرمود: حلال وحرام،حدود و احكام، و تمام آنچه كه مورد نياز تمام انسانها است؛ وفرمود: ‹ از بيان چيزي در اين كتاب فروگزار ننموده ايم ›.
و امر امامت از ويژگي تام وتمام بودن دين است، وحضرتش (ص) از دنيا رحلت ننمود مگر پس از تبيين علوم دين خود، وارائه راه آن به امت.
وپس از اگاهي از فرا رسيدن زمان سفر خود به سوي پروردگار، امت را ترك ننمود مگر پس از نصب علي،عليه السلام، به عنوان علم ونشاني در ميان امت، وامام و پيشوا براي آنان ؛ وچيزي نبود كه امت محتاج آن باشد مگر آنكه حضرتش (ص )آن را بيان فرمود. وهركه بپندارد كه خداوند دين خود را كامل ننموده، كتاب خد را قبول نكرده است، و هركه كتاب خدا را قبول نكند كافر به آنست.
آيا قدر و منزلت امام و جايگاه او نسبت به امت، امري است شناخته شده تا بتوانند نسبت به آن، وتعيين آن، مختار و مجاز باشند؟!
امامت، امري است از نظر ارزش والاترين، واز نظرشأن برترين، واز نظر مكان بالاترين، واز نظر جايگاه محكم واستوارترين، واز نظر نيل و رسيدن به آن دورترين مقام نسبت به عقل مردم، تا بتوانند با آراء خود به آن دست يابند، وبه اختيار خود آن را (امامت) برپا دارند!
امامت منزلت و مقامي است كه خداوند متعال آن را به ابراهيم، به عنوان سومين رتبه پس از مقام نبوٌت و خلٌت، اختصاص داده است؛ و يك فضيلت و برتري كه ابراهيم را به آن مجد و كرامت بخشيد، كرامتي با اعلان رسمي آن در فرموده اش: «من تورا براي مردم امام قراردادم»؛ ابراهيم(ع) با سرور و نشاط از اين اعلام، گفت: و همچنين از ذريه و فرزندانم ؟ خداوند متعال فرمود: «عهد من شامل ستمكاران نمي شود»؛ با اين فرموده به امامت هر ظالم و ستمگري تا روز قيامت، حكم بطلان داده شد، و امامت موضوعي شد انتخابي، سپس با قراردادن امامت در فرزندان ابراهيم، آناني كه خالص و پاك بودند، به ابراهيم كرامت بخشيد، و فرمود:«و به او اسحاق و يعقوب را عطيٌهاي اضافي داديم و همه آنان را از صالحين قرار داديم. و آنان را اماماني قرار داديم تا مردم را طبق دستور ما هدايت كنند؛ و به آنان نيكوكاري، اقامه نماز، و اداء زكات را وحي نموديم، و آنان پرستندگان ما بودند».
و همچنان، امامت در فرزندان ابراهيم، يكي پس از ديگري، و زماني پس از زماني ديگر، ارث گونه جريان داشت؛ تا اينكه خداوند متعال نبي اكرم،صلي الله عليه و آله، را وارث امامت قرار داد، و فرمود:« سزاوار ترين مردم به ابراهيم، آناني هستند كه از او پيروي كردند و اين پيامبر و كساني كه به اوگرويده اند؛ و خدا است ولي مؤمنان».
پس امامت امري شد اختصاصي براي رسول الله (ص)؛ و او نيز آن را، به امر خداوند متعال و به روشي كه از جانب خداوند ماموربه آن شده بود، آن را به علي(ع) واگذار نمود؛ و امامت امري شد قرارگرفته در فرزندان پاك و منتخب او، آناني كه خداوند متعال به آنهاعلم و ايمان عطا فرموده بود، به فرموده اش:‹ به آناني كه علم و ايمان داده شده بود، گفتند: شما طبق كتاب خدا، تا روز قيامت درنگ كرده ايد›. پس امامت امري است ثابت در اولاد علي(ع) تا روز قيامت؛ از آنجا كه پس از محمد، صلي الله عليه و آله، ديگر پيامبري نخواهد بود، پس انتخاب امام توسط اين نادانان چگونه خواهد بود....)
ادامه ترجمه اين خطبه مباركه را چندان لازم نمي يابم؛ چون عبارات بسيار گويا است، وكساني كه در اينگونه فرمودهها تدبر ميكنند، صاحبان فضلي هستند كه به ترجمه عبارات نياز ندارند.ا
و در باره امامت مولي امير المؤمنين، صلوات الله عليه،نيز آن حضرت، عليه السلام، ميفرمايد:
«إن الإمامة لا تكون بفعل منه في نفسه، ولا بفعل من الناس فيه اختيار او تفضيل او غير ذلك، إنما يكون بفعل من الله عز وجل فيه، كما قال لإبراهيم ‹إني جاعلك للناس إماما›، وكما قال عز وجل لداود(ع): ‹يا داود، إنٌا جعلناك خليفة في الأرض›...فالإمام إنٌما يكون إماما من قبل الله تعالي باختياره إيٌاه...»
(امامت امري نيست كه امام آن را براي خود تعيين نموده باشد؛ و نه كاري كه مردم به اختيار خود و با نگرش در بعضي برتريها و مانند آن، براي او انجام داده باشند؛ بلكه كاري است ازجانب خداوند عزٌ وجل نسبت به او، چنانچه خطاب به ابراهيم ميفرمايد : ‹من تورا امام براي مردم قرار دادم›، و به داود(ع) فرمود:‹اي داود، ما تورا خليفه و جانشين در زمين قرار داديم›)
و از اينگونه فرمايشات از همه امامان معصوم، صلوات الله عليهم، كه به گفته شما:«در جلالت شأنشان سخن و نزاعي نيست»، بسيار است.
و هرگاه از يكي از اين امامان معصوم،عليهم السلام، از القربي آمده در آيه شريفه:
«قل لاأسألكم عليه أجرا إلا المودة في القربي» سئوال ميشد،
مي فرمودند: مراد از القربي، امامان معصوم ميباشند.
بامراجعه به كتاب شريف «بحارالانوار»،باب «كتاب الامامة»،وباب«الآل والعترة»، اينگونه روايات متواترات رامي توان مشاهده نمود.
تنها به عنوان نمونه:
«عن أبي جعفر،عليه السلام،في قوله تعالي:‹قل لا أسألكم عليه أجرا إلا المودة في القربي ›،قال:هم الأئمة(ع)»
(امام باقر،عليه السلام، فرمود: القربي، امامان، عليهم السلام، ميباشند)
و روايتي از مصادر اهل سنت:
«عن ابن عباس قال لمٌا نزلت هذه الآية، قيل:يارسول الله! من قرابتك هؤلاء الٌذين وجبت علينا مودٌتهم ؟ فقال: علي و فاطمة و إبناهما»2
با تدبر در اين گفته، مييابيم : آنچه از خصايص و ويژگي هايي كه در حق اهل البيت(ع) به ما رسيده است، حق است.
با فرمودهاي كه از مولي اميرالمؤمنين،عليه السلام، بازگو شد:
«ما من شئ تطلبونه إلاٌ و هو في القرآن، فمن اراد ذلك فليسئلني»
و در پي امر خداوند متعال: وأتوا البيوت من أبوابها»
و فرموده مولي اميرالمؤمنين،عليه السلام:
«نحن الشٌعار و الأصحاب وا لخزنة و الأبواب، و لا تؤتي البيوت إلاٌ من أبوابها، فمن أتاها من غير ابوابها سمٌي سارقا؛ فيهم كرائم القرآن، و هم كنوز الرحمن، إن نطقوا صدقوا، و إن صمتوا لم يسبقوا»
و فرموده إمام صادق، عليه السلام: « و عندنا و الله علم الكتاب كله»
كه از اين فرمودهها در شأن اهل البيت(ع) چه بسيار!
تكرار ميكنم :حد اقل خصيصه جلالت شأني را كه نسبت به اين خاندان مدعي بوديد، بايد غيرخلاف و اقع و حقيقت سخن گفتن آنان باشد.
پس خانداني كه واجد علم كتاباند، كتابي كه «ما فرٌطنا في الكتاب من شئ»، قابليت پياده كردن نظام تشريع، بر اساس اين دانش و به مقتضاي رشد بشر در ادوار مختلفه، در آنان قرار داده شده است؛ كه اين همان معناي امامت قرار داده شده در امام است .
«إنٌه ليس علي الإمام إلاٌ ما حمٌل من أمر ربٌه»
پس، شيعه هيچگاه براي خود: امام، حافظ دين، و امام غائب انتخاب نكرده است؛ چون اينگونه امور خاص ناظم نظام تشريع است، كه دخالت در آن شرك محض است.
اگر در اوامر خدوند متعال، و انطباق آن بر اهل البيت(ع)، و در صدق فرمودههاي اهل البيت(ع)، كساني كه به گفته شما:
«در جلالت شأن آنان نزاع و سخني نيست»، ترديدي است؛ پس ابتدا بايد در جلالت شأن اهل البيت(ع)، و سپس در وجوب يا عدم وجوب اطاعت امر پروردگار در:
«ما آتاكم الرسول فخذوه»، تجديد نظر شود!
«قل لا أسئلكم عليه أجرا إلاٌ المودة في القربي»
«يا أيٌها لٌذين آمنوا اطيعوا الله و اطيعوا الرسول و أولي الامر منكم، فإن تنازعتم في شئ فردٌوه إلي الله و الرٌسول و أولي الأمر منكم»
«وأتوا البيوت من أبوابها».
و اما اين گفته:
اما نگاه جستجوگر تاريخ- تجربي- پسيني صادقانه ميخواهد ببيند.كه جدٌ و جهد اين "حافظان" چه چيز را براي شيعيان محفوظ نگهداشته است كه غير شيعيان از آن محروم مانده اند؟»
عرض ميشود:
با طرح اين سئوال، مطلبي ديگر به ذهنها خطور ميكند:
نگاه جستجوگر تاريخ- تجربي_پسيني صادقانه ميخواهد ببيند كه جدٌ و جهد پيامبر اسلام، چه چيز را براي مسلمانان آورده كه سائرملل از آن محروم مانده اند؟
امت اسلامي از نظر دانش روز، بسيار عقب مانده تر از ملتهاي غير مسلمان معاصر است!
اسـلام، يعني نظام تشريعي وحياني: همراه با علوم و معارفي جهت خداشناسي، با يك سلسله قوانين و مقررات براي تربيت خود، اداره جامعه، اداره مملكت، و اداره بشريت؛ كه پياده شدن آن، پس از فراگيري قوانين و مقررات آمده در آن، به عهده خود بشر است.
در نظام تكوين، خلاف نظام حاكم عملكردن، غير ممكن است؛ چون پي آمد آن فساد و نابودي است.
در نظام تشريع، بشر مختار به عمل كردن يا نكردن طبق قوانين و مقررات آن نظام است؛ و اجباري،همچون اجبار حاكم بر نظام تكوين، در بين نيست، «لا اكراه في الدين»؛ با اينكه عدم پاي بندي به مقررات نظام، فساد و هلاكت تدريجي انسان را درپي دارد.
در ملل متمدن روز، پاي بندي هر ملتي به عمل طبق مقررات و قوانين مملكتي خود بيشتر، پيشرفت جامعه از هر نظر در آن مملكت بيشتر، و تمدن در آن مملكت شكوفاتر؛ كه حقيقتي است كاملا مشهود.
رشد جوامع متمدن، به دنبال بالارفتن دانش عمومي در آن جوامع، آگاهي آنان را نسبت به لزوم رعايت قوانين و مقررات نظام،و عمل طبق آن را، در پي داشته است؛ بدون اينكه عاملي به نام دين مشوق آنان در اينگونه امور باشد.
امتهاي اسلامي را نه از آوردههاي اسلام خبري است، و نه از علوم تجربي حاصله براي بشر !
در موضوع خداشناسي، آوردههاي اسلام را به كنار نهاده؛ و سراغ فرهنگهاي پيش از اسلام رفته اند، و خود را با آن مشغول داشته،و درپي اين برمي آمدند كه به فرهنگهاي بيگانه، رنگ دين زنند؛ و آن را به عنوان علوم اسلامي در امر توحيد، به امت اسلامي معرفي نمايند.
و اكنون نيز فرهنگ قديم ايراني، «هرچه هست همه ايزد است» يا:«هوكل الاشياء» به نام عرفان اسلامي برحوزه و دانشگاه حاكم گرديده، و بيش از پيش، امت اسلامي را از اسلام و علوم اسلامي، دور نموده است.
شرط بهرهوري از اسلام، تزكيه و ايمان حاصله در پي تعلم و آموزش است؛ كه از هيچيك از آندو در جوامع اسلامي اثري نيست.
حصول ايمان، در پي شناخت آوردههاي اسلامي است؛ و نتيجه بخش بودن ايمان پس از عمل صالح است.
آيا، در جوامع اسلامي گروهي كه اين شرط لازم و ملزوم يكديگر در آنان پياده شده باشد، اثري ميتوان يافت ؟!
«فأمٌا الذين آمنوا و عملوا الصالحات فيوفيهم أجورهم و يزيدهم من فضله؛ و أمٌا الٌذين استنكفوا و استكبروا فيعذٌبهم عذابا أليما و لايجدون لهم من دون الله وليـٌا و لا نصيرا
(و اما آنان كه ايمان آورده و عمل صالح انجام دهند، پاداششان را به طور كامل خواهد داد، و از بخشش خود نيز بر آنها خواهد افزود؛ و اما آنان كه استنكاف كرده و تكبر ورزند، به عذابي دردناك آنان را تعذيب مينمايد؛ و براي خود،غير از خدا،يار و ياوري نيابند)
جوامع اسلامي را كدميك از دو گروه تشكيل ميدهند:
1- «فأما الٌذين آمنوا و عملوا الصالحات ...
2-«و أمٌا الٌذين استنكفوا و استكبروا ...
آيا، از گروه اول در جوامع اسلامي؛ اثري ميتوان يافت؟!
در نور بودن آيات قرآن كريم، قاعدتا نبايد در شما مانندي شكي باشد«جائكم من الله نور و كتاب مبين»؛ ولي، آيا اين نور در همگان با همان ويژگي ذاتي خود، يعني : منوٌريت(روشني بخشي) قابل تنفيذ و تاثير است ؟!
«و إذا ما أنزلت سورة فمنهم من يقول أيٌكم زادته هذه إيمانا؛ فأمٌا الٌذين آمنوا فزادتهم إيمانا و هم يستبشرون. و أمٌا الٌذين في قلوبهم مرض فزادتهم رجسا إلي رجسهم و ماتوا و هم كافرون»
(با نازل شدن سوره اي، افرادي ميگويند: اين سوره بر ايمان كداميك از شما افزوده است ؟! كساني كه ايمان آوردهاند نزول سورهاي بر ايمان آنان افزوده و آنان را مسرور مينمايد. اما در مريض دل ها، نزول هر سورهاي بر پليدي آنان ميافزايد وكافر ميميرند)
ذاتي نور، روشني بخش بودن آن است؛ ولي كور دلي، مانع تنفيذ نور و روشني بخشي آن در دلها ميشود.
پس شرط بهره وري از اسلام، ايماني بر اساس فراگيري علوم و معارف آن، و عمل طبق قوانين نظام تشريع است.
علت عقب ماندگي در علوم تجربي روز، چيست ؟
كوتاهي در آموزش و فراگيري دانشهاي مربوطه.
عدم بهره وري ملتهاي مسلمان از اسلام، چيست ؟
عدم آموزش و فراگيري آوردههاي وحياني اسلام از منابعي موثق.
اگر امتهاي اسلامي به آوردههاي وحياني اسلام آشنا ميشدند، و به آن عمل مي كردند؛ آنگاه دقت در نتيجه اين دانش و عمل، ما را به ارزش بازدهي اسلامي مي رساند؛ ولي با عدم فراگيري آوردههاي اسلامي از منابعي موثق، و عدم عمل مطابق آن آورده ها؛ نگرش در بازدهي اسلام در امتهاي اسلاي، امري خطا و بي مورد است.
اين قضيه، در شيعه بيشتر صادق است؛ زيرا در شيعه با ختم نبوت، همه امور ختم نشد؛ بلكه با تمسك به «قرآن كريم + اهل البيت(ع)»، فراگيري علوم قرآني همچنان بايد ادامه مييافت؛ هرچند كه سياست روز حكومت قرآن را از صدر اسلام، به سلطنت تبديل كرده باشد؛چنانچه مولي اميرالمؤمنين، عليه السلام، ميفرمايد:
«...فلمٌا مضي عليه السلام تنازع المسلمون الأمر من بعده. فوالله ما كان يلقي في روعي و لا يخطر ببالي أنٌ العرب تزعج هذا الأمر من بعده- صلي الله عليه و آله و سلٌم- عن أهل بيته، و لا أنٌهم منحوه عنٌي من بعده! ...»
(به خدا سوگند، هرگز فكر نمي كردم، و به خاطرم خطور نمي كرد كه عرب بعد از پيامبر، امر امامت را از اهل بيت او بگردانند؛ و آن را، پس از او، از من دور سازند!)
ولي، اهل البيت(ع) از وظيفه خود در ادامه تبليغ رسالات، و تزكيه و تعليم امت، تا آنجا كه قابل پياده شدن بود، كوتاهي ننمودند؛ وزندگي پر مشقت و شهادت همه آنان، در پي انجام همين وظائف محوله بوده است «ليس علي الإمام إلاٌ ما حمٌل من أمر ربٌه»
همگان موفق به استفاده از اين فرصتها براي آموزش آوردههاي اسلامي نشده اند«قليل من عبادي الشكور».
پس بايد سراغ اندك افرادي رفت كه توفيق استفاده از اين فرصتهاي خدادادي را يافته، و به آموزش آوردههاي اسلام نزد معلمين انحصاري موفق گرديده اند؛ و ديد آنان چه كسب كرده و چه امتيازي را واجد شدهاند.
«و رحمة ربٌك خير مـمٌا يجمعون» براي اكثريت نبايد بيش از يك تئوري باشد، مگر اندك افرادي كه اين رحمت ربٌ را وجدان نموده و به آن رسيده باشند.
اين رحمت ربٌ همه جا هست، و ما همچون ماهي در آب، در آن غوطه وريم؛ با اينوصف رسيدن به آن و وجدان آن، توفيق همگان نيست.
همچنين است حكم در برداشت از قرآن كريم.
«لا يجهلنٌكم الٌذين لايعلمون . إنٌ علم القرآن ليس يعلم ما هو إلاٌ من ذاق طعمه، فعلم بالعلم جهله، و بصٌر به عماه، وسمع به صممه، و أدرك به ما فات، وحيٌي به بعد إذ مات، و أثبت عند الله عزٌ ذكره الحسنات، و محي به السيئات، و أدرك به رضوانا من الله تبارك و تعالي. فاطلبوا ذلك من عند أهله خاصة، فإنٌهم خاصٌة نور يستضاء به، و أئمة يقتدي بهم؛ هم عيش العلم و موت الجهل...»
(نادانان شما را به جهالت و ناداني نكشانند. علم قرآن را كسي نمي داتد، مگر آنكه طعم آن را چشيده، وبا علم به آن، ناداني و جهل خود را بر طرف نموده باشد؛ وكوري خود را با قرآن به بصيرت و بينائي، و ناشنوائي خود را به شنوائي، تبديل نموده باشد؛ و آنچه را كه از دست داده، با قرآن به آن رسيده باشد؛ و به آن زيستن همچون مرگ را به حيات و زندگي نبديل نموده باشد؛و خوبيهاي خود را نزد خداوند سبحان به ثبت رسانده باشد، و بديها را به كمك قرآن از بين برده باشد؛ و رضا و خوشنودي خداوند متعال را به آن، به دست آورده باشد. پس، علم قرآن را تنها از اهلش بخواهيد، كساني كه به آن تخصيص يافته اند؛ چون آنانند آن نور خاصي كه روشنائي از آن طلب ميشود؛و اماماني كه به آنان اقتداء ميشود؛كه آنانند حيات و زندگي علم، و مرگ و نابودي جهل) اگر تمسك شيعه و علماء شيعه به اهل البيت(ع) ميبود، و از آنان آوردههاي وحياني اسلام را فرا گرفته بودند؛ جا داشت دقت شود و سئوال شود : نتيجه اين فراگيري، و امتياز حاصله براي آنان، چه بوده است.
ولي با عدم تمسٌك به اهل البيت(ع)، و سراغ فرهنگ بيگانگان رفتن، آيا، بازهم بايد پرسيد كه شيعه بودن چه امتيازي براي آنان داشته است ؟!
اگر حوزه يا دانشگاهي فعال، داراي كلاسهاي درس، وحضور طلبه و دانشجو در آن ملاحظه شود؛ جستجو از بازدهي كار آن حوزه و دانشگاه صحيح است.
و لي در صورت عدم مشاهده ي: تشكيل كلاس درسي، حضوراستاد و دانشجويي، و فعاليت علمي؛ در پي بازدهي كار آن حوزه و دانشگاه برآمدن، خطا است.
اينست عينا حكم اسلام و تشيٌع .
اگر شخص رسول الله،صلي الله عليه و آله، اصرار ميفرمايد(رواياتي از منابع اهل سنت):
«عليٌ منٌي بمنزلتي من ربٌي»،«علي وعاء علمي و وصيي و بابي الذي أوتي منه»، و مانند آن . و يا فرمودههاي اهل البيت(ع) :
«...فجائهم بتصديق الٌذي بين يديه، و النٌور المقتدي به. ذلك القرآن فاستنطقوه، و لن ينطق و لكن أخبركم عنه: ألا، إنٌ فيه علم ما يأتي، و الحديث عن الماضي، و دواء دائكم، و نظم مابينكم»
(...و فرستاد براي آنان چيزي را كه تصديق كتابهاي آسماني پيشين بود، و نوري كه بايد به آن اقتدا كنند؛ اين نور همان قرآن است، آن را به سخن آريد. هرچند كه هرگز سخن نمي گويد؛ اما من از جانب او به شما خبر ميدهم :آگاه باشيد، كه در قرآن است دانش آينده، خبر گذشته، داروي بيماريهاي شما، و نظم حيات اجتماعي شما)
«يا كميل لاتأخذ إلاٌ عنٌا تكن منا» (پذيراي سخن از غير ما مباش، تا از ما باشي)
و يا: «نحن الراسخون في العلم، و نحن نعلم تأويله»
(مائيم راسخان در علم، و مائيم دانا به تفسير قرآن)
«بنا عبد الله، و بنا عرف الله، و بنا وحٌد الله»،
(عبادت خدا، شناخت خدا، و توحيد خدا به ما است)، و مانند آن.
و يا فرموده امام صادق،عليه السلام:
«إنٌ الله عزٌ و جلٌ أوضح بأئمة الهدي من أهل بيت نبينا عن دينه، و أبلج بهم عن سبيل منهاجه، و فتح بهم عن باطن ينابيع علمه، فمن عرف من أمة محمد،صلي الله عليه و آله، واجب حق امامه، وجد طعم حلاوة ايمانه، و علم فضل طلاوة اسلامه، لأنٌ الله تبارك و تعالي نصب الإمام علما لخلقه، و جعله حجة علي موادٌه و عالمه...و ما لاينال ما عند الله إلاٌ بجهة اسبابه، و لا يقبل الله عمل العباد إلاٌ بمعرفته...»
(خداوند متعال از طريق امامان هدايت گر از اهل بيت نبي ما، به تبيين دين خود پرداخت، و راه خود را به وسيله آنان روشن ساخت، و باطن علم خود رابه وسيله آنان گشود. پس آنكه از امت محمد،صلي الله عليه و آله، حق واجب امام خود را بشناسد، شيريني و حلاوت ايمان خود را چشيده، و به فضل و برتري اسلام موردقبول خود، آگاه گشته است. چون خداوند متعال امام را به عنوان علم و نشان براي خلقش نصب نموده، و او را براي كساني كه همواره در راه رشد و تعالي هستندو براي همه اهل عالم، حجت و دليل قرار داده است...به آنچه نزد خداوند است نمي توان رسيد مگر از طريق سبب ها؛ و خداوند متعال اعمال بندگان را نمي پذيرد مگر به شناخت آنان امام را)
به منظور نماياندن راه انحصاري فرا گيري معالم دين، به امت اسلامي است؛ تا پس از رحلت رسول الله،صلي الله عليه و آله، به فرهنگهاي قبل از اسلام بر نگردند؛ و براي خدا شناسي، سراغ كتاب اثولوجيا مانندي كه فلوطين يوناني مؤسس مكتب«نوافلاطونيان» آن را تدوين نموده، نروند.
ولي ميبينيم افرادي با عنوان آيت اللهي، رسما اعلام ميدارند:
«دانشمندان اسلامي كه فلسفه را از يونان آوردند و تعديل كرده، خود صاحب نظر شدند؛ انگيزه آنان اين بود كه بعد(دوري) معارفي و عقلي قرآن را بهتر بفهمند و بتوانند آن را ضابطه مند كنند...علوم ادبي و عربي و علوم استدلالي(منطق) براي اين جنبههاي قرآن پديد آمد و فلسفه نيز براي معارفي كه قرآن دارد، مورد استفاده قرار ميگيرد»
حال، اگر امت اسلامي به وظيفه خود در آموزش و فراگيري علوم اسلامي از منابع موثق، عمل ننموده باشد؛ وعدم دانش او، مانع از تعلق امتياز اسلام و تشيع به او شده باشد؛ ملامت سزاوار امت اسلامي است، يا سزاوار اسلام و تشيع؟!
من به مرضي مبتلا شده ام، پزشك معالج نيز براي تشخيص و درمان مرض من، وجود دارد.
آيا، عدم مراجعه من به پزشك؛ و يا، به دلائلي سياسي، عدم اجازه حكومت وقت به پزشك براي نظارت بر بيماران؛ ملامت عدم صحت من، بر پزشك و علوم پزشكي است؟!
يا بر سهل انگاري خود من، و عوامل بازدارنده پياده شدن علم پزشكي در جامعه؟!
و اما اين سخن:
«اكر بزرگترين مفسٌران و عارفان و متكلمان و مدافعان ديانت اند، از ميان غير شيعيان برخواسته اند، وحتي شيعيان در اين حوزهها وامدار آنان بودهاند... به حق عظيمي كه تفسير مفاتيح الغيب فخرالدين رازي بر الميزان طباطبائي دارد و صدها نمونه ديگر) و اگر هم اختلافي دارند(كه دارند) به هيچ وجه چنان نيست كه آراء شيعيان برتري بي چون و چرا بر ديگران يافته باشد. واگر فقيهان اند، نه فقهي كه غير شيعيان بنا كردهاند فروتر از فقه شيعيان است و نه تفاوت آراء فقهي شيعيان و غير شيعيان، از تفاوت آراء فقيهان شيعي(اصوليان و اخباريان)، بيشتر و عميق تر است.و نه چنين تفاوتهاي خرد يا درشت فقهي و قشري(كه في المثل"در وضو" پا را بجاي مسح كردن، بشويند، يا در رضاع، چند جلسه شير بدهند...) مدخليتي در گوهر ايمان كه پارسايي است، دارد. عمده عزم بر طاعت و عبوديت است كه با هر نظام فقهي قابل جمع است» عرض ميشود:
براي سنجش حق و باطل، يا سنجش ارزش آئين و مكتبي، سراغ افراد يا پيروان آن مكتب رفتن، نشانگر هدف در تخطئه و كوبيدن آن آئين و مكتب است.
چون شرط لازم براي شروع به سنجش، حصول يقين به تطابق عملكرد آن افراد با اصول آئين و مكتب مورد مطالعه است.
مي گويند:«إنٌ الحقٌ و الباطل لا يعرفان باقدار الرجال؛اعرف الحقٌ تعرف اهله، اعرف الباطل تعرف اهله»
ابتدا بايد تشيع، يعني: مكتب اهل البيت(ع)، وشرائط لازم براي شيعه بودن؛ وغير تشيع، و عوامل ورود به تشيع يا خروج از آنرا شناخت، و سپس در پي مقايسه آن دو برآمد.
امامان معصوم و پيشوايان مكتب تشيع، عليهم السلام، در توصيف شيعه فرموده اند:
«شيعتنا المسلٌمون لأمرنا، الآخذون بقولنا، المخالفون لأعدائنا، فمن لم يكن كذلك فليس منٌـا»
پس، تسليم اوامر اهل البيت(ع) بودن، فرمودههاي آنان را گرفتن، مخالف دشمنان آنان بودن، از شرايط لازم شيعه بودن است؛ كه در صورت عدم وجود يكي از شرايط ياد شده در فردي، از دائره تشيع خارج بودن او، قطعي است.
پس علوم و معارف اسلامي تبيين شده در مكتب اهل البيت(ع) در كساني قابل پياده شدن است كه واجد شرايط ياد شده باشند.
در تاييد اين مطلب، كافي است بازگويي فرموده امام صادق، عليه السلام:
«كذب من زعم أنه من شيعتنا و هو متمسك بعروة غيرنا»
همين عبارت:
«اكر بزرگترين مفسٌران و عارفان و متكلمان و مدافعان ديانت اند، از ميان غير شيعيان برخواسته اند، وحتي شيعيان در اين حوزهها وامدار آنان بوده اند(به ... و خضوع او در مقابل محي الدين عربي بينديشيد
حاكي از عدم بينش صحيح نسبت به دين اسلام است.
عرض شد: گوساله پرستي نيز دينداري است، و ارسال رسل و انزال كتب در تمام ادوار، براي رهائي بشر از اينگونه دينداريها بوده است.
از كجا ميتوان پي برد تفسير آيات قرآن كريم، مطابق با حقيقت است.
مگر خداوند متعال تبيين و تفسير كتاب علمي قرآن را در تبيين خود، منحصر ننموده است «ثمٌ إنٌ علينا بيانه» ؟!
و اعلام فرمود: «ثمٌ أورثنا الكتاب الٌذين اصطفينا من عبادنا»؛ كتاب و علم كتاب را نزد كساني منتخب ار جانب خود، قرار داده ايم .
قرار اين كتاب در كجا ميتواند باشد ؟ در محلي كه طهارت ذاتي آن باشد، چون «لايمسٌه إلاٌ المطهرون».
آيا، پاك ترين و طاهرترين محل، نبايد جايي باشد كه خداوند متعال، طهارت آن را اعلام فرموده است ؟
«إنٌما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس اهل البيت فيطهٌركم تطهيرا»
پس محل قرار قرار قرآن و علوم قرآن، تنها و تنها اهل البيت(ع) ميباشند.
و اين خانداني كه در حقشان سخن شما اين بود: «در جلالت شأن آن بزرگواران سخني و نزاعي نيست»، با عباراتي مختلف فرموده اند:
«فنحن الذين اصطفانا الله عزٌ و جل و أورثنا هذا الٌذي فيه تبيان كل شئ»2
«مائيم آنكه خداوند متعال آنان را انتخاب و قرآني را كه در آن تبيين همه چيز است نزد ما به ارث گذارده است»
ويا فرموده مولي اميرالمؤمنين، عليه السلام:
«إنٌ الله طهٌرنا و عصمنا و جعلنا شهداء علي خلقه، و حجته في أرضه، و جعلنا مع القرآن و القرآن معنا، لا نفاره و لايفارقنا»
ويا فرموده امام صادق، عليه السلام: علم الكتاب و الله عندنا».
در نتيجه، تنها تفسير و تبييني از آيات قرآن را ميتوان تفسير ناميد، كه براساس فرمودهها و تعاليم اهل البيت(ع)، باشد؛ چون ديديم اين خاندان اعلام فرموده بودند: «ليس شئ أبعد من عقول الرٌجال من تفسير القرآن»
وچون تفاسير غير مقتبس از اهل البيت(ع)، چه تفاسير سني و چه شيعي، نمي تواند از تفسير به رأي دور باشد، صاحبان آن از نظرمكتب اهل البيت(ع)، و طي اين حكم:
«من فسربرأيه آية من كتاب الله فقد كفر»،كافرند.
عارفان و متكلمان را طي اين عبارت:
«اكر بزرگترين مفسٌران و عارفان و متكلمان و مدافعان ديانت اند»، به مدافعان دين توصيف نمودن، حاكي از همان عدم برداشت صحيح شما از دين اسلام است، اسلامي كه به وسيله اهل البيت(ع) تبيين شده است.
چون روش عارفان مخصوصا، در تناقض كامل با دين اسلام است؛ زيرا:
«يعبدون من دون الله ما لم ينـزٌل به سلطانا» معبود عارفان هستي است، بدون اينكه در كتاب و سنت پشتوانهاي بر تاييد صحت اين معبود،يعني: خدابودن هستي، وجود داشته باشد.
و به همين دليل است فرمايش اهل البيت(ع) در حق آنان:
«فمن ذهب إلي زيارة أحد منهم حيا او ميتا فكأنٌما ذهب إلي زيارة الشيطان و عبدة الاوثان...» پس حكم عارفاني كه شما از آنان سخن ميگوئيد نسبت به اسلام، همچو حكم گوساله پرستان، خورشيد و ماه پرستان، و مانند آن، ميباشد.
و عرفان همان فرهنگ قديم ايراني است و آن را با اسلام هيچ رابطهاي نيست؛ اگر لازم شد به توضيح اين مطلب نيز خواهم پرداخت.
و اهل كلام نيز گروهي هستند كه همواره اهل البيت(ع) شيعيان را از نشست با آنان، هشدار ميداده اند:
«إيٌاك و اصحاب الكلام و الخصومات و مجالسهم. فإنٌهم تركوا ما أمروا بعلمه و تكلٌفوا ما لم يؤمروا بعلمه حتيٌ تكلفوا علم السماء»
(بپرهيز از اصحاب كلام و از گفتگو باآنها؛ آنان آنچه را موضف به فراگيري آن بودند ترك نموده، و خود به مشقت انداختند در
زمينه هايي كه موظف نبودند، تا اينكه به هيئت نيز پرداختند)
«فإنٌ الكلام و الخصومات تفسد النية و تمحق الٌدين»
(كلام و بحث در آن، فساد درون و نابودي دين را در پي خواهد داشت)
پس، عارفان و متكلمان مدافعان دين خود هستند؛ وآنان را با اسلام كاري نيست، هرچند ادعاي اسلام كنند.
«عمده، عزم بر طاعت و عبوديت است»
طاعت و عبوديت كي ؟ گوساله، گاو، خورشيد، ماه، هستي،....
در اسلام، اساس دين، شناخت و معرفت معبود، عنوان شده است:
«أول الدين معرفته»؛ و ارسال رسل و انزال كتب نيز به منظور هدايت بشر به سوي معبود حقيقي او بوده است.
آيا، از چيستي معبودي كه در اسلام از او صحبت ميشود، سخني گفته شده است ؟!
آيا، به مسلمان اجازه انديشه و سخن در ذات، داده شده است ؟!
پس عارفان به آنچه به نام معبود رسيده اند،يعني: هستي، انتخاب خودسرانه نياكان آنان است، بدون رعايت شرط لازم الاتباع ما لم ينـزل به سلطانا؛ و در نتيجه معبود آنان، غير معبود معرفي شده در فرهنگ اسلامي است!
عدم تمسك به اهل البيت(ع)، انصراف عرفاي اسما شيعه را از تشيع و اسلام موجب گشته؛ و خضوع در برابر محي الدين، به سبب و گرايش به سوي فرهنگهاي قبل از اسلام است!
با انتخاب معبودي خودسرانه، خروج آنان از تشيع و اسلام، قطعي است؛ پس نبايد رفتار خطا يا صواب اينگونه افراد به عنوان ميزاني در سنجش مكتب تشيع به حساب آيد.
واما اين گفته:
«مقام "شرح و تبيين و حفاظت و صيانت" اگر به ظاهر شريعت راجع شود، در ميزان تاريخ و تجربه، وزن گراني نمي يابد و اگر به ولايت باطني راجع شود، آن حديث ديگري است كه جز بسط تجربه نبوي مفاد و معنايي ندارد. و سالكان طريق قرب را، به تفاريق و تفاوت، از آن رزقي و نصيبي هست»
عرض ميشود:
اگر ملاك و ميزان، تاريخ و تجربه باشد؛ غير خداپرستي همواره سنگين تر از خدا پرستي، و امري بوده است حاكم بر انسانها .
«و ما آمن معه إلا قليل»، «قليلا ماتؤمنون»،«إلا الٌذين آمنوا و عملوا الصالحات و قليل ماهم »
و اگر معدودي هم خداپرست يافت ميشده اند، ايمان بيشتر آنان با شرك آلوده بوده است «و ما يؤمن أكثرهم بالله إلاٌ و هم مشركون» .
و اندك افرادي كه به رستگاري رسيده اند، تنها كساني هستند كه تسليم محض خداوند متعال بوده، و با فراگيري علوم و معارف وحياني از منابع موثق، به شناخت نسبي خود و خالق و مالك خود،يعني: خداوند متعال، نائل گرديدهاند.
حال كه اين گروه انكند، آيا تقصير از تزكيه و تعليم اديان است؛ يا فرار بشر از آموزش و فراگيري، و فرار او از تزكيه و عمل طبق مقرارت نظام؟!
نصيب سالكان طريق، قرب به چي است ؟!
قرب به عجل سامري، اصنام، و يا به خود خدا يابي؟!
عارفي كه نسبت به چگونگي عملكرد اندام خود، جاهل است؛ و دربرابر استيلاء خواب، و يا حمله پشه و مگسي براو، توان دفع آن را از خود ندارد؛ و مدت زندگي او را به لحظه نسبت به اين جهان هستي، نمي توان تعبير كرد؛عدم تسليم، او را به بيراهه كشانده و خود و همگان را خدا مييابد؛ و رسما ادعاي خدائي ميكند، و اين ادعارا براي همگان نيز، جائز ميداند: «صحٌ لـه التـألٌه».
وجهان وجهانيان را خيال و پوچ ميپندارد، كه ارثي است از فرهنگ ايران باستان؛ بدون هيچگونه رابطهاي با آوردههاي وحياني نبوي!
تمام اديان و مذاهب را با پاروي ناباوري روبيدن؛ حاكي از تخليه دروني از احساس عبوديت و مملوكيت است؛ و خود را شايد خدا يافتن!
تاريخ را ميزان و ملاك صحت و سقم باورها قرار دادن، حاكي از ايجاد حالت فرار از عبوديت و مملوكيت است.
و اين گفته شما:
«اگر تمدني، تمدني اسلامي است، آنگاه همه اين تمدن، نمايشگاه آن اسلامي است كه به آن جان و نام داده است. نمي توان پارههاي خوب را از آن اسلام و پارههاي بد را محصول توطئه دشمنان اسلام دانست»
عرض ميشود:
آيا، ملتي را متمدن به تمدن اسلامي بر اساس باورهاي استوار بر علوم وحياني،
يافتهايد؟!
دعاوي بسيار است؛ آيا در شما معرفت و شناختي نسبت به موارد مورد ادعاء، و شناختي نسبت به تطابق يا عدم تطابق اين دعاوي با موارد مورد ادعاء، حاصل شده است؛ تا بر صحت و يا سقم آن دعاوي، بتوانيد حكم كنيد ؟!
تاريخ نزد شما داور است!
آيا، حكومتهاي اسلامي بني اميه و بني العباس، براساس نظام و علوم وحياني اسلام، استوار بودند ؟!
البته، لازمه توان پاسخ به اين پرسش، ابتداء شناخت علوم وحياني اسلام، و سپس شناخت عملكرد بني اميه و بني العباس، است.
بسيار بجا بود كه عباراتي رساناي مراد شما از «بسط تجربه نبوي» نيز، بيان ميفرموديد!
قضاوت تاريخ را به سوي مردمي كشانده ايد، كه نه آنان را از آوردههاي وحياني اسلام، خبري است؛ و نه از عمل طبق برنامه نظام تشريع، در آنان اثري!
نظام بهداشتي، بر جهان و بر يكايك ما انسان ها، حاكم است.
براي ارزيابي اين نظام حاكم، سراغ تاريخ ميرويم؛ يا سراغ ميزان آگاهي مردم ازنظام يهداشتي حاكم، و ميزان رعايت آنان از اصول آمده در اين نظام ؟!
اگر، قضاوت چگونگي عملكرد نظام بهداشتي را به تاريخ بسپاريم، جز مردود شدن نظام، و غير مثمر ثمر يافتن آن، نتيجهاي ديگر حاصل نخواهد شد!
ليكن، اگر قضاوت را به دانشي بسپاريم كه به ما از ميزان شناخت مردم از نظام بهداشت، و از ميزان رعايت آنان از مقررات نظام، خبر دهد؛ خواهيم ديد، نظام بهداشت حاكم، نظام كاملي است؛ ولي همواره قصور و كوتاهي از جانب مردم نسبت به آگاهي از مقررات نظام، و عمل طبق مقررات آن بوده است.
هر فرد يا ملتي، با آگاهي و دانش بيشتر نسبت به نظام جهاني بهداشت، و عمل بهترطبق مقرات آن نظام، و عدم تجاوز به حدود و ثغور آن؛ سلامت در آن فرد يا ملت، بيشتر؛ و رنج و تعب از عدم سلامتي وبهداشت در آن فرد يا جامعه كمتر.
اولين آسيب پذير در ناديده گرفتن حدود و مرزهاي بهداشت، خود فرد است با از دست دادن سلامتي خود، و در رنج به سر بردن از اثرات سوء امراض!
حال، با عدم رعايت حدود و مرزهاي بهداشت؛ آيا علت حاكم بودن ناسلامتي و امراض بر فرد يا جامعهاي، به نظام بهداشت نسبت داده ميشود، يا به خود فرد و جامعه ؟!
اين حكم، در همه ً نظامهاي حاكم برجهان، و از آنها نظام تشريع، يعني: دين، عينا جاري و ساري است.
در تبيين مواردي از نظام تشريع، ميبينيم خداوند متعال ما را از تعدي و تجاوز نسبت به نظام تشريع، هشدار ميدهد:
«تلك حدود الله، فلا تقربوها»، «تلك حدود الله فلا تعتدوها، و من يتعدٌ حدود الله فأولئك هم الظالمون»، «ومن يتعدٌ حدود الله فقد ظلم نفسه»،...
حال، با عدم رعايت حدود و مرزهاي نظام تشريع كه لازمه آن ظلم بر خود است، ظلمي كه اثرات سوء آن فورا بر فرد يا ملتي حاكم ميشود؛ آيا، اين اثرات سوء حاكم بر افراد و ملت ها، به نظام تشريع وعدم كارسازي آن نسبت داده ميشود؛ يا به خود انسانها و ملت هايي كه:
1- در پي شناخت حدود و مرزهاي نظام تشريع برنيامده، و در نتيجه نتوانستهاند آن حدود و مرزها را رعايت كنند ؟!
2- ويا اگر هم در اندكي آگاهي نسبت به بعضي ازحدود و مرزهاي نظام تشريع، حاصل شده است؛ عدم تجاوز به آن حدود و مرزها را رعايت ننموده اند!
در اسلام، اساسي ترين رمز دستيابي به حقايق، شناخت ذكر شده است:
«يا كميل، ما من حركة إلاٌ و أنت تحتاج فيها إلي المعرفة»
آيا، تاخير در دست يابي به قوانين نظام تكوين، و در نتيجه تاخير در دست يابي به كرات آسماني، به علت عدم كمال نظام تكوين است، يا تاخير بشر در آشنايي و شناخت حقايق نظام تكوين ؟!
علوم وحياني اسلام، امت اسلامي را از قبل، به حقيقت امكان دست يابي به كرات آسماني، موضوعي كه غير قابل باور همگان بود، خبر داده است.
«ألم تروا أنٌ الله سخٌر لكم مافي السماوات والارض»
آيا، اگر ملت اسلامي درپي شناخت اين حقيقت بر ميآمد، لازمه اش دستيابي او قبل از ديگران، به كرات آسماني و به سائر حقايق حاكم بر نظام تكوين نبود ؟!
آيا، آوردههاي وحياني اسلام موجب عقب ماندن امت اسلامي از ساير ملتها در دستيابي به حقايق تكوين، و عقب ماندن او از استفاده از رموز حاكم بر نظام آفرينش، شده است؛ يا عدم اعتناء امتهاي اسلامي به اين آورده ها، و عدم سعي آنان در شناخت اين حقايق، و سرگرم ساختن خود را به فرهنگهاي بيگانه پيش از اسلام؟!
آيا، قضاوت را براي رديابي دراينگونه امور، بايد به تاريخ سپرد؟!
يا ابتداء به دانشي نسبت به آوردههاي وحياني اسلام، و سپس به آگاهي از عملكرد يا عدم عملكرد امتهاي اسلامي نسبت به اين آوردههاي وحياني ؟
براي شناخت تمدن اسلام، بايد در پي شناخت آوردههاي اسلام از منابعي موثق برآمده و به تجزيه و تحليل آن به پردازيم؛ و سپس به سراغ عملكرد ملتهاي مسلمان رفته، و تطابق يا عدم تطابق عمل آنان را با آوردههاي وحياني اسلامي، به سنجيم .
و تنها تاريخ را داور در اينگونه امور قراردادن، حاكي از سعي در فرار از حقايق؛ و ناشناختهها را براي توده مردم، نكاتي منفي جلوه دادن است!
از عنوان ولايتي كه شما را بسيار در تعب و رنج انداخته است، اگر شرط معرفت و شناخت را براي دست يابي به حقايق، رعايت كنيد؛ خواهيد ديد امري است عرفاني، و ربطي به اسلام ندارد؛ چون در اسلام اينگونه ولايت ها، بدون ويژگي عصمت، غيرقابل تحقق است.
و آنچه را كه تاريخ و دانش ازعلت عدم گرايش انسانها به اديان الهي، و عدم پياده شدن نظامهاي تشريع درملت ها، به ما ارائه ميدهد، حقيقت :
«و ما منع الناس أن يؤمنوا إذ جائهم الهدي و يستغفروا ربٌهم إلاٌ أن تأتيهم سنٌة الأولين أو
يأ تيهم العذاب قبلا»
در پي سنت نياكان خود بودن ملتها بوده است؛ وعملكرد اين عامل به قدري قوي است كه حتي پس از گرايش به صورت ظاهر به آئيني الهي، سنت نياكاني به عنوان آوردههاي آن آئين، به توده مردم نمايانده ميشده است؛ همچون موضوع عرفان(تصوف) در امت اسلامي.
در تبيين آنچه را به خاتميت مربوط ميشود، همين بس؛ و تحليل مانده سخنان شما، در فرصتي ديگر .
والحمد لله ربٌ العالمين.
محمد صــدرزاده
|
collection: Encyclopedia
- Abdul-Bahá. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Ages and Cycles. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Akhund, Haji (Haji Mulla `Ali-Akbar Shahmirzadi). Moojan Momen. [more]
- Alain Locke: Baha’i Philosopher, in Baha’i Studies Review. Christopher Buck. , 10 (2001/2002), page 7–49 (London: Association for Baha'i Studies English-Speaking Europe, 2001). [more]
- Ali Bastami, Mulla. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Amin, Haji Abu'l-Hasan. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Badí` Khurasani. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Baha'i and Bábí Faiths, Early Western Accounts of. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Baha'i Faith, in The 1998 Canadian Encyclopedia. Douglas Martin. (McClelland & Stewart, Inc., 1997-09-06). Includes overview of the Baha'i Faith in Canada [more]
- Baha'i Faith and the Environment, The. Richard Landau. [more]
- Bahá'í Faith in Australia. Graham Hassall. [more]
- Baha'i Faith, The: World Religious Statistics, in Britannica Book of the Year. . A reprint of the widely-circulated encyclopedia article showing the Baha'i Faith to be the world's second most wide-spread religion. [more]
- Bahá'í History. Moojan Momen and Peter Smith. A general survey of the history of the Baha'i Faith, including a brief overview of main events in Babi and Baha'i history. Next, a series of themes that have developed throughout Baha'i history is examined. [more]
- Baha'is, in Encyclopedia of the Qur'an. Christopher Buck. , Volume 1, A-D, pages 197-99Jane Dammen McAuliffe, ed. (Leiden: Brill, 2001). Summary of Baha'i history and teachings. [more]
- Baha'is, in Encyclopaedia of the Qur’an. Christopher Buck. , Vol. 1, pages 194-196 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2001). This is the only Baha'i-related article in The Encyclopaedia of the Qur’an. It emphasizes both the Baha'i Faith's continuities and discontinuities with Islam. [more]
- Bahá'u'lláh. Juan Cole. [more]
- Browne, Edward Granville. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Buddhism and the Baha'i Faith. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Circumpolar Regions (Arctic): History of the Baha'i Faith. Will C. van den Hoonaard. [more]
- Clara and Hyde Dunn. Graham Hassall. [more]
- Community, Baha'i. Will C. van den Hoonaard. [more]
- Covenant, The, and Covenant-breaker. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Esslemont, John Ebenezer. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Euphemia Eleanor Baker. Graham Hassall. [more]
- Family Life. Will C. van den Hoonaard and Deborah K. van den Hoonaard. [more]
- Fasting. John Walbridge. [more]
- First Tablet to Napoleon III: Biography of Napoleon, in Encyclopedia Britannica. Various. . [more]
- Greatest Name, The (al-Ism al-A`zam). Stephen Lambden. [more]
- Gulpáygání, Mirza Abu'l-Fadl. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Haziratu'l-Quds. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Holley, Horace Hotchkiss. R. Jackson Armstrong-Ingram. [more]
- Iran: History of the Baha'i Faith. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Kitab-i Aqdas, the Most Holy Book. John Walbridge. [more]
- Kitab-i-Iqan, in Encyclopedia Iranica. Christopher Buck. . [more]
- Moody, Susan. R. Jackson Armstrong-Ingram. [more]
- Mulla `Abdu'l-Karim Qazvini (Mirza Ahmad Katib). John Walbridge. [more]
- Naw-Rúz: The Bahá'í New Year. John Walbridge. [more]
- Netherlands: History of the Baha'i Faith. Will C. van den Hoonaard. [more]
- Nineteen Day Feast. John Walbridge. [more]
- Prayer and Worship. John Walbridge. [more]
- Prejudice and Discrimination. Will C. van den Hoonaard. [more]
- Progressive Revelation. Robert Stockman. [more]
- Registry of Early Canadian Believers. Will C. van den Hoonaard. A report on the recent progress in developing the Registry of Early Canadian Believers, 1893-1944, an adjunct project of A Short Encyclopedia of the Bahá'í Faith. [more]
- Religious Background of the 1979 Revolution in Iran. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Religious Pluralism. Seena Fazel. [more]
- Ridvan, in Sacred Acts, Sacred Space, Sacred Time. John Walbridge. . [more]
- Robert Hayden, in Oxford Encyclopedia of American Literature. Christopher Buck. , 2:4, pages 177-181 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004-01). Biography of Robert Hayden, the first African American poet-laureate, and a celebrated Baha'i. This article calls Hayden "America's Bicentennial Poet Laureate" for the first time in scholarship. [more]
- Rogers, Otto Donald, in The 1998 Canadian Encyclopedia. Norman Zepp. (McClelland & Stewart, Inc., 1997-09-06). [more]
- Russia. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Scholarship on the Baha'i Faith. Moojan Momen. This article is a survey of attempts to analyse and study the Babi and Bahá'í Faith from a scholarly viewpoint. [more]
- Schopflocher, Siegfried. Will C. van den Hoonaard. [more]
- Scripture. Robert Stockman. [more]
- Shi`i Islam. Moojan Momen. [more]
- Tablet of the Temple (Suratu'l-Haykal). John Walbridge. [more]
- Tablet of Wisdom (Lawh-i hikmat). Juan Cole. [more]
- Lawh-i-Páp. Tablet to Pope Pius IX: Biography of Pope Pius IX, in Encyclopedia Britannica. Various. . "Lawh-i-Páp". [more]
- Lawh-i-Malikih. Tablet to Queen Victoria: Biography of Queen Victoria, in Encyclopedia Britannica. . "Lawh-i-Malikih". [more]
- Lawh-i-Malik-i-Rus. Tablet to Tsar Alexander II: Biography of Tsar Alexander, in Encyclopedia Britannica. Various. . "Lawh-i-Malik-i-Rus". [more]
- Tablets to the Rulers (Surat al-Muluk). Juan Cole. [more]
- Turkmenistan. Moojan Momen. [more]
- United Kingdom: History of the Baha'i Faith. Moojan Momen. [more]
- United States of America: History of the Baha'i Faith. Robert Stockman. [more]
- Zaynab, in Military Women Worldwide: A Biographical Dictionary. John Walbridge. Reina Pennington, ed. . [more]
|
|
No. |
Name |
Role* |
Date |
Place |
Method |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1978 | |||||
| 1. | Mr. Ahmad Ismá’ílí | 1978 | Ahram | Killed | |
| 2. | Mr. Díyá’u’lláh Haqíqat | Aug 13 | Jahrum | Killed | |
| 3. | Mr. Shír-Muhammad Dastpísh | December | Buyr-Ahmad | Mobbed | |
| 4. | Mrs. ‘Avad-Gul Fahandizh | Dec 14 | Shíráz | Mobbed | |
| 5. | Mr. Sifatu’lláh Fahandizh | Dec 14 | Shíráz | Mobbed | |
| 6. | Mr. Khusraw Afnání | Dec 22 | Míyán-Duáb | Mobbed | |
| 7. | Mr. Parvíz Afnání | Dec 22 | Míyán-Duáb | Mobbed | |
| 1979 | |||||
| 8. | Mr. Ibráhím Ma’navi | early 1979 | Hisár | Killed | |
| 9. | Mr. Hájí-Muhmmad ‘Azizi | Jan 9 | Khurmúj | Beaten | |
| 10. | Mr. Husayn Shakúrí | Apr 2 | Ushnavíyyíh | Killed | |
| 11. | Mr. ‘Alí-Akbar Khursandí | LSA | Apr 12 | Tehran | Hanged |
| 12. | Mr. Bahár Vujdání | Sep 27 | Mahábád | Executed | |
| 13. | Mr. ‘Alí Sattárzádíh | Oct 28 | Búkán | Killed | |
| 14. | Mr. ‘Azamatu’lláh Fahandizh | Dec 14 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 1980 | |||||
| 15. | Mr. Habíbu’lláh Panáhí | Feb 4 | Urúmíyyih | Assassinated | |
| 16. | Mr. Ghulám-Husayn A’zamí | May 6 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 17. | Mr. ‘Alí-Akbar Mu’íní | May 6 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 18. | Mr. Badi’u’lláh Yazdání | May 6 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 19. | Mr. Parviz Bayáni | May 11 | Píránshahr | Executed | |
| 20. | Mr. Mir-Asadu’lláh Mukhtárí | May 18 | Andrún | Stoned | |
| 21. | Mr. Hasan Ismá’ílzádíh | June | Sanandaj | Killed | |
| 22. | Mr. Yúsuf Subhání | Jun 27 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 23. | Mr. Yadu’lláh Astání | LSA | Jul 14 | Tabríz | Executed |
| 24. | Dr. Farámarz Samandari | LSA | Jul 14 | Tabríz | Executed |
| 25. | Mr. Muhammad Akbarí | Jul 16 | Rasht | Executed | |
| 26. | Mr. Yadu’lláh Mahbubíyán | Jul 30 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 27. | Mr. Dhabíhu’lláh Mu’miní | Aug 15 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 28. | Mr. Núru’lláh Akhtar-Khávarí | ABM | Sep 8 | Yazd | Executed |
| 29. | Mr. ‘Azizu’lláh Dhabíhíyán | ABM | Sep 8 | Yazd | Executed |
| 30. | Mr. Firaydún Faridání | ABM | Sep 8 | Yazd | Executed |
| 31. | Mr. Mahmúd Hasanzádíh | Sep 8 | Yazd | Executed | |
| 32. | Mr. ‘Abdu’l-Vahháb Kázimi-Manshádí | Sep 8 | Yazd | Executed | |
| 33. | Mr. Jalál Mustaqím | LSA | Sep 8 | Yazd | Executed |
| 34. | Mr. ‘Ali Mutahari | LSA | Sep 8 | Yazd | Executed |
| 35. | Mr. Rídá Firúzí | Nov 9 | Tabríz | Executed | |
| 36. | Mr. Muhammad-Husayn Ma’súmí | Nov 23 | Núk, Birjand | Burned | |
| 37. | Mrs. Shikkar-Nisá Ma’súmí | Nov 23 | Núk, Birjand | Burned | |
| 38. | Mr. Bihrúz Saná’í | Dec 17 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 1981 | |||||
| 39. | Dr. Manúchihr Hakim | NSA | Jan 12 | Tehran | Assassinated |
| 40. | Mr. Mihdi Anvari | Mar 17 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 41. | Mr. Hidáyatu’lláh Dihqání | Mar 17 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 42. | Mrs. Núráníyyih Yárshátir | Apr | Shíráz | Assassinated | |
| 43. | Mr. Sattár Khushkhú | Apr 30 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 44. | Mr. Ihsánu’lláh Mihdí-Zádih | Apr 30 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 45. | Mr. Yadu’lláh Vahdat | ABM | Apr 30 | Shíráz | Executed |
| 46. | Mr. Muhmmad (Suhráb) Habibí | LSA | Jun 14 | Hamadán | Executed |
| 47. | Mr. Muhammad-Baqir (Suhayl) Habíbí | LSA | Jun 14 | Hamadán | Executed |
| 48. | Mr. Husayn Khándil | LSA | Jun 14 | Hamadán | Executed |
| 49. | Mr. Tarázu’lláh Khuzayn | LSA | Jun 14 | Hamadán | Executed |
| 50. | Mr. Husayn Mutlaq | LSA | Jun 14 | Hamadán | Executed |
| 51. | Dr. Fírúz Na’ími | LSA | Jun 14 | Hamadán | Executed |
| 52. | Dr. Nasir Vafá’í | LSA | Jun 14 | Hamadán | Executed |
| 53. | Mr. Buzurg ‘Alaviyán | LSA | Jun 23 | Tehran | Executed |
| 54. | Mr. Háshím Farnúsh | ABM LSA | Jun 23 | Tehran | Executed |
| 55. | Mr. Farhang Mavaddat | LSA | Jun 23 | Tehran | Executed |
| 56. | Dr. Masíh Farhangí | CBC |
Jun 24 | Tehran | Executed |
| 57. | Mr. Badí’ulláh Farid | Jun 24 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 58. | Mr. Yadu’lláh Pústchí | Jun 24 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 59. | Mr. Varqá Tibyániyán (Tibyání) | Jun 24 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 60. | Mr. Kamálu’d-Din Bakhtávar | Jul 26 | Mashhad | Executed | |
| 61. | Mr. Ni’matu’llah Kátibpúr Shahidi | Jul 26 | Mashhad | Executed | |
| 62. | Mr. ‘Abdu’l-‘Alí Asadyárí | LSA | Jul 29 | Tabríz | Executed |
| 63. | Mr. Husayn Asadu’lláh-Zadeh | LSA | Jul 29 | Tabríz | Executed |
| 64. | Mr. Mihdí Báhiri | LSA | Jul 29 | Tabríz | Executed |
| 65. | Dr. Masrúr Dakhílí | LSA | Jul 29 | Tabríz | Executed |
| 66. | Dr. Parvíz Fírúzí | LSA | Jul 29 | Tabríz | Executed |
| 67. | Mr. Manúchihr Khádí’í | LSA | Jul 29 | Tabríz | Executed |
| 68. | Mr. Alláh-Vírdí Mítháqi | Jul 29 | Tabríz | Executed | |
| 69. | Mr. Habíbu’lláh Tahqíqí | LSA | Jul 29 | Tabríz | Executed |
| 70. | Mr. Ismá’íl Zihtáb | LSA | Jul 29 | Tabríz | Executed |
| 71. | Mr. Husayn Rastigar-Námdár | Aug 5 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 72. | Mr. Habíbu’llah ‘Azizí | LSA | Aug 29 | Tehran | Executed |
| 73. | Mr. Bahman ‘Atifi | Sep 11 | Dáryún, Isf. | Executed | |
| 74. | Mr. ‘Izzat Atifi | Sep 11 | Dáryún, Isf. | Executed | |
| 75. | Mr. Ahmad Ridvání | Sep 11 | Dáryún, Isf. | Executed | |
| 76. | Mr. Atá’u’lláh Rawhání | Sep 11 | Dáryún, Isf. | Executed | |
| 77. | Mr. Gushtásb Thábit-Rásikh | Sep 11 | Dáryún, Isf. | Executed | |
| 78. | Mr. Yadu’lláh Sipihr-Arfa | Oct 23 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 79. | Mr. Mihdí Amin Amin | NSA | Dec 27 | Tehran | Executed |
| 80. | Mr. Jalál ‘Azizi | NSA | Dec 27 | Tehran | Executed |
| 81. | Dr. ‘Izzatu’lláh Furúhi | ABM NSA | Dec 27 | Tehran | Executed |
| 82. | Mrs. Zhínús Ni’mat Mahmúdi | ABM NSA | Dec 27 | Tehran | Executed |
| 83. | Dr. Mahmúd Majdhúb | NSA | Dec 27 | Tehran | Executed |
| 84. | Mr. Qudratu’lláh Rawhání | NSA | Dec 27 | Tehran | Executed |
| 85. | Dr. Sírús Rawshani | NSA | Dec 27 | Tehran | Executed |
| 86. | Mr. Kámrán Samimi | NSA | Dec 27 | Tehran | Executed |
| 1982 | |||||
| 87. | Mrs. Shiva Mahmudi Asadu’llah-Zadeh | LSA | Jan 4 | Tehran | Executed |
| 88. | Mr. Iskandar ‘Azizi | LSA | Jan 4 | Tehran | Executed |
| 89. | Mrs. Shidrukh Amir-Kiyá Baqa | Jan 4 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 90. | Mr. Fathu’llah Firdawsi | LSA | Jan 4 | Tehran | Executed |
| 91. | Mr. Khusraw Muhandisi | LSA | Jan 4 | Tehran | Executed |
| 92. | Mr. Kúrush Talá’í | LSA | Jan 4 | Tehran | Executed |
| 93. | Mr. Atá’u’lláh Yávari | LSA | Jan 4 | Tehran | Executed |
| 94. | Mr. Ibráhím Khayrkháh | Feb 22 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 95. | Mr. Husayn Vahdat-i-Haq | Feb 28 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 96. | Mr. ‘Askar Muhammadi | Apr 2 | Rahímkhán, Kírmán | Assassinated | |
| 97. | Mr. Ihsánu’lláh Khayyámi | Apr 12 | Urúmíyyih | Executed | |
| 98. | Mr. ‘Azizu’llah Gulshani | Apr 29 | Mashhad | Executed | |
| 99. | Mrs. Ishraqiyyih Faruhar | LSA | May 8 | Karaj | Executed |
| 100. | Mr. Mahmud Faruhar | LSA | May 8 | Karaj | Executed |
| 101. | Mr. Badí’u’lláh Haqpaykar | LSA | May 8 | Karaj | Executed |
| 102. | Mr. Agahu’lláh Tizfahm | May 10 | Urúmíyyih | Executed | |
| 103. | Miss Jaláliyyih Mushta il Uskú’í | May 10 | Urúmíyyih | Executed | |
| 104. | Mrs. Irán Rahímpúr (Khurmá’í) | May 12 | Dizfúl | Executed | |
| 105. | Mr. Nasru’lláh Amini | LSA | May 16 | Kháníábad,Tehe. | Executed |
| 106. | Mr. Sa’du’lláh Bábázádeh | LSA | May 16 | Kháníábad,Tehe. | Executed |
| 107. | Mr. Atá’u’lláh Haqqání | Jun 1 | Tehran | Killed | |
| 108. | Mr. Muhammad Abbásí | LSA | Jul 9 | Qazvín | Executed |
| 109. | Mr. Jadidu’lláh Ashraf | LSA | Jul 9 | Qazvín | Executed |
| 110. | Manúchihr Farzánih Mu’ayyad | LSA | Jul 9 | Qazvín | Executed |
| 111. | Mr. Muhammad Mansúrí | LSA | Jul 9 | Qazvín | Executed |
| 112. | Mr. Manúchíhr Vafá’i | Jul 9 | Tehran | Assassinated | |
| 113. | Mr. ‘Abbás-Ali Sadiqipur | Jul 15 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 114. | Mr. ‘Ali Na’imíyán | Aug 11 | Urúmíyyih | Executed | |
| 115. | Mr. Habibu’lláh Awji | Nov 16 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 116. | Mr. Dhíyá’u’lláh Ahrári | LSA | Nov 21 | Shíráz | Executed |
| 117. | Mr. Husayn Nayyiri-Isfahani | Nov 29 | Isfahán | Died in Prison | |
| 118. | Mrs. Guldánih ‘Alipúr | Dec 24 | Sári | Mobbed | |
| 1983 | |||||
| 119. | Mr. Hidáyatu’lláh Síyávushí | LSA | Jan 1 | Shíráz | Executed |
| 120. | Mr. Yadu’lláh Mahmúdnizhad | LSA ABM | Mar 12 | Shíráz | Executed |
| 121. | Mr. Rahmatu’lláh Vafá’í | LSA | Mar 12 | Shíráz | Executed |
| 122. | Mrs. Túbá Zá’irpúr | Mar 12 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 123. | Mr. Adadu’llah (Aziz) Zaydí | Apr 1 | Míyán-Duáb | Killed | |
| 124. | Mr. Jalál Hakímán | May 1 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 125. | Mr. Suhayl Safá’í | May 1 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 126. | Dr. Bahrám Afnán | LSA | Jun 16 | Shíráz | Executed |
| 127. | Mr. ‘Abdu’l-Husayn Azádí | LSA | Jun 16 | Shíráz | Executed |
| 128. | Mr. Kúrush Haqbín | LSA | Jun 16 | Shíráz | Executed |
| 129. | Mr. ‘Ináyatu’lláh Ishráqí | Jun 16 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 130. | Mr. Jamshíd Siyávushí | LSA | Jun 16 | Shíráz | Executed |
| 131. | Mr. Bahrám Yaldá’í | Jun 16 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 132. | Miss Shahín(Shírín) Dálvand | Jun 18 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 133. | Mrs. ‘Izzat Jánamí Ishráqí | Jun 18 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 134. | Miss Ru’yá Ishráqí | Jun 18 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 135. | Miss Muná Mahmúdnizhád | Jun 18 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 136. | Miss Zarrín Muqímí-Abyáníh | Jun 18 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 137. | Miss Mahshíd Nírúmand | Jun 18 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 138. | Miss Símín Sábírí | Jun 18 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 139. | Mrs. Táhirih Arjumandí Síyávushi | Jun 18 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 140. | Miss Akhtar Thábit | Jun 18 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 141. | Mrs. Nusrat Ghufrání Yaldá’í | LSA | Jun 18 | Shíráz | Executed |
| 142. | Mr. Suhayl Húshmand | Jun 28 | Shíráz | Executed | |
| 143. | Mr. Ahmad-‘Alí Thábít- Sarvístání | Jun 30 | Shíráz | Died in Prison | |
| 144. | Mr. Muhammad Ishráqí | ABM | Aug 31 | Tehran | Died in Prison |
| 145. | Mr. Akbar Haqíqí | Sep 19 | Khuy | Mobbed | |
| 146. | Mr. Bahman Díhqání | Nov 19 | Muhammadíyyíh | Mobbed | |
| 147. | Mr. ‘Abdu’l-Majíd Mutahhar | Dec 15 | Isfahán | Died in Prison | |
| 1984 | |||||
| 148. | Mr. Rahmatu’lláh Hakímán | Jan 11 | Kírmán | Died in Prison | |
| 149. | Mr. Ghulám-Husayn Hasanzádih-Shákíri | Mar 10 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 150. | Mr. Muhsin Radaví | Mar 13 | Tehran | Died in Prison | |
| 151. | Mr. Nusrat’ulláh Díyá’í | Mar 19 | Báft, Kírmán | Died in Prison | |
| 152. | Mr. Kámrán Lutfí | Apr 9 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 153. | Mr. Rahím Rahímíyán | Apr 9 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 154. | Mr. Yadu’lláh Sábíríyán | Apr 9 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 155. | Mr. Asadu’lláh Kámíl-Muqaddam | May 2 | Tehran | Died in Prison | |
| 156. | Mr. Maqsúd ‘Alízádih | May 5 | Tabríz | Executed | |
| 157. | Mr. Jalál Payraví | ABM | May 5 | Tabríz | Executed |
| 158. | Mr. Jahángír Hidáyati | NSA | May 15 | Tehran | Executed |
| 159. | Mr. ‘Ali-Muhammad Zamání | May 15 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 160. | Mr. Nusratu’lláh Vahdat | Jun 17 | Executed | ||
| 161. | Mr. Ihsánu’lláh Kathírí | Jun 27 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 162. | Dr. Manúchíhr Rúhí | Aug 16 | Bujnúrd | Executed | |
| 163. | Mr. Aminu’lláh Qurbánpúr | Aug 25 | near Tehran | Died in Prison | |
| 164. | Mr. Rustam Varjávandí | Sep 15 | Tehran | Died in Prison | |
| 165. | Mr. Shápúr (Húshang) Markazi | NSA ABM | Sep 23 | Tehran | Executed |
| 166. | Mr. Fírúz Purdil | Oct 30 | Mashhad | Executed | |
| 167. | Mr. Ahmad Bashiri | NSA | Nov 1 | Tehran | Executed |
| 168. | Mr. Yúnis Nawrúzi-Iránzád | LSA | Nov 1 | Karaj | |
| 169. | Mr. ‘Alíridá Níyákán | Nov 11 | Tabríz | Died in Prison | |
| 170. | Mr. Díyá’u’lláh Maí’í-Uskú’í | Nov 13 | Tabríz | Died in Prison | |
| 171. | Dr. Farhád Asdaqí | NSA | Nov 19 | Tehran | Executed |
| 172. | Mr. Fírúz Atharí | LSA | Dec 9 | Tehran (Karaj) | Executed |
| 173. | Mr. Ghulám-Husayn Farhand | LSA | Dec 9 | Tehran (Karaj) | Executed |
| 174. | Mr. ‘Ináyatu’lláh Haqíqí | LSA | Dec 9 | Tehran (Karaj) | Executed |
| 175. | Mr. Jamál Káshání | LSA | Dec 9 | Tehran (Karaj) | Executed |
| 176. | Mr. Jamshíd Púr-Ustádkár | LSA | Dec 9 | Tehran (Karaj) | Executed |
| 177. | Dr. Rúhu’lláh Ta’lím | LSA | Dec 9 | Tehran (Kirmánsháh) | Executed |
| 1985 | |||||
| 178. | Mr. Rúhu’lláh Hasúrí | Jan 21 | Yazd | Executed | |
| 179. | Mr. Rúhu’lláh Bahrámsháhi | LSA | Feb 25 | Yazd | Executed |
| 180. | Mr. Nusratu’lláh Subháni | Mar 5 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 181. | Mr. ‘Abbás Idilkhání | Aug 1 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 182. | Mr. Rahmatu’lláh Vujdání | LSA | Aug 31 | Bandar-‘Abbás | Executed |
| 183. | Mr. Núr’ud-Din Tá’ifí | Oct 12 | Gurgán (Kirmánsháh) | Died in Prison | |
| 184. | Mr. ‘Azízu’lláh Ashjárí | Nov 19 | Tabríz | Executed | |
| 1986 | |||||
| 185. | Mr. Paymán Subháni (reported) | Apr 28 | Saráván | Mobbed | |
| 186. | Mr. Sirru’lláh Vahdat-Nizámí | May 4 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 187. | Mr. Fidrus Shabrukh | May 9 | Záhidán | Executed | |
| 188. | Mr. Farid Bihmardí | NSA | Jun 10 | Tehran | Executed |
| 189. | Mr. Habíbu’lláh Muhtadí | Aug 27 | Tehran | Killed | |
| 190. | Mr. Bábak Tálibí | Sep 2 | Karaj | Beaten | |
| 191. | Mr. Iraj Mihdi-Nizhád | Sep 4 | Bandar-‘Abbás | Mobbed | |
| 1987 | |||||
| 192. | Mr. Ahmad Kávih | Jan 26 | Isfahán | Killed | |
| 193. | Mr. Surúsh Jabbári | Mar 3 | Tehran | Killed | |
| 194. | Mr. Abu’l-Qásim Sháyiq | Mar 3 | Tehran | Killed | |
| 195. | Mr. Ardishír Akhtarí | Sep 28 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 196. | Mr. Amír-Husayn Nádiri | Sep 28 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 1988 | |||||
| 197. | Mr. Bihnám Páshá’í | presumably Nov | Tehran | Executed | |
| 198. | Mr. Iradj Afshín | presumably Nov | Tehran | Executed | |
| 199. | Mr. Mihrdad Maqsudi | Feb 16 | Urúmíyyih | Killed | |
| 1992 | |||||
| 200. | Mr. Bahman Samandari | Mar 18 | Tehran | Executed | |
| 201. | Mr. Ruhu’lláh Ghedami | Jun 17 | on Qum Highway | Killed | |
| 1995 | |||||
| 202. | Mr. Shirvin Falláh | Approx Dec | Arak | Killed | |
| 1997 | |||||
| 203. | Mr. Mansúr Dawlat | Apr 4 | Kírmán | Killed | |
| 204. | Mr. Shahrám Reza’i | Jul 7 | Rasht | Killed | |
| 205. | Mr. Mashá’lláh Enáyatí | Jul 4 | Isfahán | Beaten in prison | |
| 1998 | |||||
| 206. | Mr. Rúhu’lláh Rawhání | Jul 21 | Isfahán | Executed | |
| * Many of those killed or executed played a leadership role in the Iranian Bahá’í community. The acronym “LSA” in this column indicates that the person was a member of a local Spiritual Assembly, the community-elected local Bahá’í governing council. “NSA” identifies a member of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of Iran, the national-level governing council. “ABM” identifies an “auxiliary board member,” an appointed leadership position within the Bahá’í administrative framework. “CBC” identifies a member of the Continental Board of Counsellors, an appointed leadership position which oversees the auxiliary board members. | |||||
| Book Club Best Practices |
|
This section identifies some of the practices that characterize successful book clubs, from set-up through monthly meetings--and beyond. Getting Started
Selecting Books
Publicizing Your Book Club
Facilitating Group Discussion
|
Wilmette, IL, December ‘05: The Story of Baha’u’llah: Promised One of All Religions (Baha’i Publishing, $15, soft cover, ISBN 1-931847-13-4), is a “good first book” for those interested in the life and teachings of the founder and prophet of the Bahá'í Faith, says its author, Druzelle Cederquist. She says she came up with the idea for writing an accessible book on Baha’u’llah when her two now-grown sons were young. “I would read to them regularly,” says Cederquist, who has been a Baha’i for more than 30 years. “They liked mysteries. So I decided my book would not be just a biography, but a page-turning biography. It would be for people who want to explore their purpose in life and to look more deeply into what Baha’u’llah teaches us.” From page one, The Story of Baha’u’llah does indeed meet the author's aspirations. The characters come alive through dialogue and details, and the beliefs of the Baha’i Faith are explained clearly and concisely. Cederquist even includes a helpful glossary and bibliography. The author also puts her subject into historical context so readers can get a sense of the times of which she writes. Even as Baha’u’llah was espousing the ideas of the oneness of humankind, the elimination of prejudice of all kinds, and the equality of men and women, the Abolitionist and women's rights movements were occurring in America. In The Story of Baha'u'llah is also the story of the Baha’i Faith's prescription for a better world. Cederquist says she hopes that by learning about the religion’s central teachings through her book, readers will see the positive side of difficulties. “Baha’u’llah said the purpose of religion is to advance civilization,” Cederquist says. “By bringing issues of conflict to the surface, we can address and resolve them.” To receive a review copy of The Story of Baha’u’llah, or to schedule an interview or event with Druzelle Cederquist, contact Tim Moore at 847-425-7964. E-mail: tmoore@usbnc.org.Published: 4/4/2005
"Is military intervention for humanitarian purposes morally justified? Is it ever morally required?"
"Numerous scholars have concluded that the prospects for a global ethic are slim indeed. I suggest that there is indeed a possibility for the development of a global ethic - and that the scriptures of the various religions that are so often viewed as the source of ethical disagreement and discord may provide the foundation for such an ethic."
Lepard identifies many areas of agreement in religious scriptures, pointing out that all scriptures promote a vision of one human family that transcends nationality or ethnicity. His inspiration for HOPE FOR A GLOBAL ETHIC was an outgrowth of his research for a previous book on the legal problems of military intervention, which led him to search for common ethical principles to help resolve these legal issues. "It seemed to me that the world's religions were potent sources of ethical inspiration for most people and governments around the world," notes Lepard. "I soon discovered that some of the shared ethical principles that I mined from scriptures supported similar principles in contemporary international law."
While HOPE FOR A GLOBAL ETHIC may be optimistic, it is not naïve. It is rooted in a discussion of the world's religions but derives it's strength from the author's practical background and involvement in international law, human rights, and the community of scholars of law and religion. It is not dogmatic, nor does it seek to advance one point of view over another. Brian Lepard takes no sides, and views all religions equally. Reviewing selections from the sacred texts of seven world religions - Hinduism, Judaism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Christianity, Islam, and the Baha'i Faith - Lepard identifies numerous common threads, such as:
kindness; generosity; unselfishness; peaceful resolution of disputes; freedom of religion and conscience; the right to life, physical security, and subsistence .
These are just a few of the basic principles that all religions share and which can lead us to a global ethic. History shows that human beings desire faith. Lepard's careful reading and close analysis of scripture conveys that all religious belief systems have similar roots, goals, and values. Instead of living in fear and ignorance, why not look to these systems as a source of dialoug and understanding? Lepard offers a practical and affirming view of how this might be done.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Brian D. Lepard is Professor of Law at the University of Nebraska and a specialist in international human rights law. A graduate of Princeton University and the Yale Law School, he is the author of the internationall acclaimed Rethinking Humanitarian Intervention. He has also served at the United Nations Office of the Baha'i International Community, where he worked on human rights issues. He lives with his wife and two sons in Lincoln, Nebraska.
Baha'i Publishing
David Chilton
.
Published by Dominion Press
Typesetting by Thoburn Press,
Printed in the
ISBN 0-930462-55-6
|
PUBLISHER’S PREFACE 3. The Coming of the Antichrist 5. The Coming of the New Covenant 10. All Creation Takes Vengeance 11. It Is Finished! |
By—Gary North
The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of
Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. And the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death (1 Corinthians 15:24-26).
The Bible teaches that Jesus shall reign over the earth. Once it begins, there will be no interruption of His earthly reign over this earth in history until death shall at last be conquered. But we know that death ends only on the final day, when Christ puts an end to Satan’s final rebellion, when the devil is cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:7-10).
The key kingdom question is: When will His reign over earth begin? Jesus was very clear about this. He told His disciples after His resurrection:
All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen (Matthew 28:18-20).
So, all power in heaven and in earth has already been given to Christ. Already! We know also that He is reigning with God in heaven.
And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: and hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all (Ephesians 1:19-23).
Is Christ the head of the church today? Paul said that He is. But what else is also true today, according to Paul? The passage is clear: Jesus Christ now rules the earth from heaven above. He is presently over all principality, power, might, and dominion. What are these? They are demonic spirits. Paul wrote in this same epistle: “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” (Ephesians 6:12).
God is in control. Jesus is in control. All things are in principle under Jesus’ feet. It is true that in history, evil beings still have power. We as Christ’s people wrestle spiritually against them. The war between good and evil, between right and wrong, goes on daily in the life of every Christian and in the life of every society. But, in principle, life is stronger than death, for Jesus’ resurrection has proven this. The resurrection is more powerful than the cross. Light is more powerful than darkness (John 1:9). Good is more powerful than evil, for Christ now reigns from on high. The legacy of the “second Adam,” Jesus Christ, is more powerful in history than the legacy of the first Adam. Grace is more powerful than sin.
You believe this, don’t you?
Why Fear a “Great Tribulation”?
Why, then, should Christians believe that some great tribulation faces them in the future — a tribulation so great that nothing like it in history has ever occurred? Not all Christians believe that they will go through the tribulation, although post-tribulation premillennialist do. But if God reigns from on high, why should Christians expect anything worse than the “normal” holocausts of the twentieth century — the persecutions and genocides of Armenians, Jews, Russian kulaks, Ukrainians, and Cambodians? These were indeed terrible events, and there may well be more of them, but why should Christians expect that another event will occur that is fundamentally worse?
The answer is: they shouldn’t. Why not? Because the great tribulation is behind us. This is what David Chilton argues in The Great Tribulation. Jesus warned His people of a great tribulation to come in the very near future. In the chapter on the great tribulation in Matthew, Christ’s words are recorded: “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled” (Matthew 24:34). We know from the parallel passage in Luke that the great tribulation would be the destruction of
And when ye shall see
David Chilton’s magnificent commentary on the Book of Revelation is appropriately called The Days of Vengeance (Dominion Press, 1987). This little book is a brief survey of those sections of Revelation that deal with the fall of
Are You Looking Forward to Disaster?
It may sound strange to many readers that the great tribulation is behind us. This view has been quite common throughout church history, but over the last hundred years or so, many Bible-believing groups have adopted a different view: that the great tribulation will happen to
What the Bible teaches is that it took place in A.D. 70, and Christians did not go through it.
This book introduces readers to the theology of judgment: specifically, God’s judgment sanctions against
Our Comprehensive Responsibility
I realize that this will disappoint many Christians. If the great tribulation is over, then the Rapture is not scheduled to take place prior to this tribulation. The rapture of the saints — the resurrection of dead saints and the instant transformation of those still alive on earth (I Corinthians 15:52) — gets delayed until the final act of history, when Satan rebels and Christ comes back to judge the world (Revelation 20:7-10). This means that until then, Christians will remain on earth as God’s delegated agents of judgment in history, preaching the gospel, applying God’s law to every area of life, and progressively subduing the earth to the glory of God (Genesis 1:26- 28). This means that there will be no earthly escape for church members from the progressively heavy responsibilities of exercising dominion.
Sadly, there are millions of Christians today who have adopted a philosophy of the future that teaches that most people will die and go to hell — and then be tossed into the lake of fire for all eternity (Revelation 20:14) — and nothing the church can do will be able to overcome their resistance to the gospel. The Holy Spirit will simply never change the hearts of a majority of mankind. They will inevitably perish. With over 5 billion people alive today, and with billions more to be born in the next 40 years, this is a pessimistic doctrine of the future. Yet today’s Christians prefer to believe in this horrible scenario than to believe in the growth of the church and the triumph of the gospel, for such a triumph would place tremendous responsibility on those who call themselves Christians. They really would rather see billions of people perish eternally than to admit to themselves that they, as Christians, will be called on by God to take responsibility in this world — in the areas that many Christians call “secular” —because of a world-wide revival.
We who call ourselves Christian Reconstructionists proclaim a future worldwide revival and the steady, voluntary submission of people to God’s law. We believe that Christians will steadily be given responsibilities in every area of life in a world that has run out of workable answers. God will give us these responsibilities, but not through revolution or tyranny. Instead, He will give us these responsibilities in history through the voluntary submission of those who have no other hope, and who (until that final rebel-lion of Revelation 20) will be willing to allow Christians to bear these social, political, military, and economic responsibilities.
We believe in revival. We believe in evangelism and foreign missions. So do all Christians. But we Reconstructionists have this unique outlook: we believe that these gospel efforts will be successful in history. When we call other Christians to intensify their efforts to spread the gospel, we offer them this unique motivation: their efforts will eventually prove successful in history. The gospel of Jesus Christ will not prove to be a failure in history. The power of the resurrection is greater than the power of the devil and his human followers to resist the most powerful message in man’s history: that Jesus Christ has borne the sins of man, and that evil has in principle been overcome. As time goes on, this gospel will triumph in history.
Mankind’s New Beginning
It is one of those oddities of recent intellectual history that perhaps the most succinct and perceptive comment on the Christian view of history is provided by a secular Jew who teaches law at
In contrast to the other Indo-European peoples, including the Greeks, who believed that time moved in ever recurring cycles, the Hebrew people conceived of time as continuous, irreversible, and historical, leading to ultimate redemption at the end. They also believed, however, that time has periods within it. It is not cyclical but maybe interrupted or accelerated. It develops. The Old Testament is a story not merely of change but of development, of growth, of movement toward the messianic age — very uneven movement, to be sure, with much backsliding but nevertheless a movement toward.
Berman then goes onto explain how Christianity adopted this view of linear time, but added a key new element:
Christianity, however, added an important element to the Judaic concept of time: that of transformation of the old into the new. The Hebrew Bible became the Old Testament, its meaning transformed by its fulfillment in the New Testament. In the story of the Resurrection, death was transformed into a new beginning. The times were not only accelerated but regenerated. This introduced a new structure of history, in which there was a fundamental transformation of one age into another. This transformation, it was believed, could only happen once: the life, death, and resurrection of Christ was thought to be the only major interruption in the course of linear time from the creation of the world until it ends altogether (pp. 26-27).
The Great Tribulation shows that this transformation of the old order into Christ’s new order was decisively manifested in the public termination of the old order: the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple and its sacrificial system. This was the shaking of the foundations in history.
Modern Christians are almost totally unfamiliar with the events of A.D. 70. The eschatological view-points that predict the great tribulation in the future led to the neglect in popular Christian literature of the story of the fall of Jerusalem. David Chilton has performed a major educational service to the church of Jesus Christ in reminding us what a momentous event the fall of Jerusalem was. From the fall of Jerusalem until the future conversion of the Jews (Romans 11), which will inaugurate a period of unprecedented earthly blessings (w. 12-15), nothing else comes close as a public manifestation of Christ’s new order.
What we need to understand is that Satan is a great imitator. God defeated him at Calvary, but he still seeks to defeat Christians in their lives. God imposed a great tribulation on the old order of the apostate Hebrews, but Satan imitates God by imposing holocausts on mankind through his followers. Christ inaugurated a new world order, and so Satan’s followers now promise to bring us a new world order. The Marxists do, the Nazis did, and the New Age movement does. It is all a counterfeit. Accept no substitutes! Remember Christ's words: “But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come unto you” (Matthew 12:28). He cast out devils by the Spirit of God, so the kingdom of God had come to them. It is now our inheritance as members of Christ’s new nation, the church, for He told the Jews of His day: “The kingdom of God shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof” (Matthew 21:43). Christ’s new world order has come, and the fall of Jerusalem is proof. As Berman says of the resurrection: “This introduced a new structure of history, in which there was a fundamental transformation of one age into another. This transformation, it was believed, could only happen once: the life, death, and resurrection of Christ was thought to be the only major interruption in the course of linear time from the creation of the world until it ends altogether.” The worst is over!
Moojan Momen
Summary
In this paper, I start by discussing a controversy that has erupted recently over the issue of the exact point in time that Baha'u'llah became aware of his mission. The controversy revolves around the translation of a phrase in the writings of Baha'u'llah which appear to state that he does not have any "amr". One side to the controversy claims that the translation of this phrase indicates that Baha'u'llah had no thought of advancing any claim as late as 1857, while the opposing party contends that this is a mistranslation of the phrase and that Baha'u'llah was fully aware of his mission from at least the time of his imprisonment in the Siyah-Chal. I intend to show in this paper that the whole controversy is an illusory one caused by the specific nature of the meaning of the word "amr" and that the phrase that is the subject of dispute proves neither side's case, however it is translated. Evolving out of my discussion of this issue, is a theological schematic of the stages of the evolution of the mission of those persons that Baha'is call Manifestations of God. I then putatively impose this schematic upon the dispensation of the Bab creating a new interpretation of his ministry.
In recent years, a disagreement has emerged among scholars about the exact meaning of a particular phrase in Baha'u'llah's work, the Sahifih-yi-Shattiyyih (Book of the River or Book of the Tigris), and the evidence that it might contain about Baha'u'llah's thinking at the stage in his ministry to which this work can be dated.
On the one hand, Cole contends that, from his translation of a certain phrase the Book of the River, it is clear that, at the time that he composed this work (which Cole dates to about 1857), Baha'u'llah "is making no claim to have a divine Cause" (Juan R. I. Cole, "The Book of the Tigris", online at: http://bahai‑library.org/provisionals/river.html). Cole states that he believes that it was not until about 1859 that Baha'u'llah began to put forward a claim and that the Book of the River is evidence that, in 1857, Baha'u'llah had no thought of such a claim.
This view is opposed by Saiedi who states that Cole's translation of a particular phrase is incorrect. Saiedi argues that Baha'u'llah was fully conscious of his mission and station during the
The key area in dispute revolves around the translation of a phrase which occurs in the Sahifih-yi-Shattiyyih. The sentence in which this phrase occurs may be transliterated thus: "Walakin, chih guyam, kih hich iqbal bih amri nadaram." The first part of this sentence, "Walakin, chih guyam," is in idiomatic Persian formulation expressive of despair or frustration. Saeidi has rendered it "Yet, alas", while Cole has translated it more literally "But what shall I say?" The difference of opinion focusses however upon the meaning of the second half of this sentence. The literally word-for-word rendering of this phrase would be "no approach to any amr do I have". Cole has considered that the word amr has "the connotation of `divine Cause'" (e-mail on H-Bahai list, 20 October 2001) and thus this phrase is an indication that Baha'u'llah, at this stage, had no idea of advancing a claim to a divine mission. Saeidi responds by asserting that this phrase is "a common polite Persian idiom which indicates reluctance or disinclination to approach an issue or engage in a task" (Saiedi, "Concealment", p. 35). Saeidi therefore disputes Cole's conclusion that this phrase indicates that Baha'u'llah conceived of no divine mission at this stage.
Part of Saeidi's argument is that the context within which this phrase appears makes his interpretation the more likely one. In the preceding paragraphs, Baha'u'llah is likening divine revelation to a river and divine omnipotence to the power of a river when it floods. The sentence in question appears at the end of this discourse, just after Baha'u'llah has stated that if it were not for the malice in people's hearts, he would continue his theme and disclose all of the spiritual meanings inherent in this analogy of the river. Saeidi argues that it is clear from the context that Baha'u'llah is using this sentence to terminate this discourse, thus making Saeidi's translation more likely. To demonstrate this argument, I will here give the translations of both Cole and Saeidi of the passage in which the disputed phrase occurs:
"If it were not for fear of the hidden chains in the breasts of the people, I would have continued to mirror forth all divine parables and subtleties of the celestial laws with reference to the very flowing of this physical river. But what shall I say? I make no claim to a Cause. The intensity of the sorrow and grief that have befallen me during these days has left me sorely tried between the Gog of silence and the Magog of speech. I beseech God to send down an Alexander who will erect a protecting wall. Hidden allusions have been concealed in these phrases and sacred letters have been treasured up in these words. Happy are those who have grasped these pearls, have appreciated their value, and have attained their presence." (Juan R. I. Cole, "The Book of the
Were it not for fear of the malice hidden in the hearts, I would have assuredly unveiled all the inmost divine analogies and all the subtleties of the heavenly principles with regard to the course of this outward river. Yet, alas, I am disinclined to approach any matter. On account of the intensity of My anguish and sorrow, in these days I am sore tried between the Gog of silence and the Magog of utterance. I beseech God to send down an Alexander who will raise an insurmountable barrier. (Saiedi, "Sahifiy-i-Shattiyyih (Book of the River) Revealed by Baha'u'llah: a Provisional Translation" Journal of Baha'i Studies, 9/3 (1999) 59)
Cole has recently countered Saeidi's contextual argument by finding another passage in the writings of Baha'u'llah from the same period in which a similar phrase appears: "ma`lum va mubarhan ast kih in bandih az khud dhikri va amri nadarad" (Ayat‑i Bayyinat, Dundas, Canada: Association for Baha'i Studies in Persian, 1999, pp. 3-4). In this passage, Baha'u'llah states that, should Baha'u'llah's name be mentioned, this would not become a cause of contention, because he has not put forward with respect to himself any mention or amr (e-mail on H-Bahai list 20 October 2001). Cole claims that these two occurrences are cognates of each other and hence refute Saeidi's contextual argument (since the context of the second occurrence is completely different).
Cole has also supported his argument by pointing out that at the beginning of the Sahifih-yi-Shattiyyih, Baha'u'llah rejects any claim that he has performed any miracles although he asserts that the claims that the Bab and the Mirrors (mirat, a station given by the Bab to some of his leading disciples) of the Babi dispensation performed miracles should not be doubted. Cole maintains that this is evidence that Baha'u'llah was, at this time, subordinating himself to the Mirrors of the Babi dispensation, and is thus further evidence that he was not claiming any station for himself.
Cole's conclusions from all of this is that there is no historical evidence for Baha'u'llah putting forward a claim to a divine mission before 1859 when there are accounts by such people as Fitnih and Nabil-i Akbar that Baha'u'llah intimated such a claim to them (Juan R. I. Cole, "The Book of the Tigris"). Cole rejects the evidence that Baha'u'llah's account of his experience in the Siyah-Chal constitutes an experience of divine revelation (wahy), rather he states that "it appears that it consisted more of ilham or inspiration than of wahy or revelation, and that Baha'u'llah began thinking of islah or reform of Babism rather than of making any claim of his own" (Juan R. I. Cole, "The Book of the Tigris"). Cole thus maintains that the notion of claiming a divine mission did not occur to Baha'u'llah until sometime after about 1857 and before 1859.
Saeidi has presented a number of other pieces of evidence to support his position that Baha'u'llah was aware of his station and mission since at least the Siyah-Chal experience and possibly earlier. In affirmation of the fact that Baha'u'llah considered the Siyah-Chal experience of 1852-3 to be revelation (rather than inspiration as Cole claims), Saeidi quotes several references to this episode in the writings of Baha'u'llah. Of particular interest is the reference from the writings of Baha'u'llah which parallels the Tablet to the Shah but instead of referring to "the breezes of the All-Glorious" wafting over him, he uses the phrase "the breezes of Revelation (wahy)" (Saiedi, "Concealment", pp. 49-50), thus indicating that Baha'u'llah thought that what occurred in the Siyah-Chal was revelation (wahy) rather than merely inspiration (ilham).
Saeidi also cites several instances where Baha'u'llah has stated that his revelation arose in the year Nine, i.e. 1852-3 or the year "after Hin" (after 68, i.e. 1269/1852-3, Saiedi, "Concealment", pp. 51-5).
Furthermore, Saeidi questions Cole's dating of this work to about 1857. Cole has based this on the fact that one of the Hidden Words is quoted in the Sahifih-yi-Shattiyyih, but it is quoted slightly differently than in the form in which it appears in the final form of the Hidden Words. Cole argues from this that the Sahifih-yi-Shattiyyih can be dated to a time after the Hidden Words were first revealed but before the final version was distributed, which he considers to be about 1857. Saeidi states however that there are numerous instances of Baha'u'llah quoting his own works slightly differently from the way that they were originally revealed and many years after the work was originally revealed. Indeed in the case of the Hidden Words, one of these is quoted in a slightly different form in the tablet to Nasiru'd-Din Shah. If Cole's reasoning were correct then this tablet would also date from about 1857, whereas it belongs in fact to the late
The correspondence on this issue has been extensive and has gone on over several years, but as far as I am aware, Cole has not responded to any of these latter points that Saeidi has raised.
The Meaning of the Word "Amr"
My purpose is reviving this issue is to raise a further point that has not been considered by any of the numerous persons who has discussed this question on several e-mail lists. It is clear that the original point over which Cole and Saeidi disagreed was the meaning of "hich iqbal bih amri nadaram." Indeed it could be said that the disagreement focussed on the word "amr" - whether this word was being used by Baha'u'llah in the specific and technical sense of "Divine Command or Cause" or whether it was being used in the more general sense of "matter" or "affair". The word amr is also central to the second example that Cole has found - in which Baha'u'llah states: "ma`lum va mubarhan ast kih in bandih az khud dhikri va amri nadarad"
In a paper presented at the Irfan Colloquium in 1999 ("A Study of the Word `Amr' in the Qur'an and in the Writings of Baha'u'llah," published in Lights of Irfan, Book 1, pp. 81-94), I have given an extensive analysis of the word "amr" in both the Qur'an and in the Kitab-i-Iqan. I will not here repeat the detailed analysis given there, but it can be stated in summary that in the Qur'an the word amr has a complex range of meanings which is not easily translated by a single English word. When used in connection with God, it certainly means the Divine commission or decree which descends upon a Messenger of God in the form of Revelation, as Cole has stated. But it also is used to denote the judgement of God upon the people - those who accept the Messenger of God are saved and rewarded and those who refuse and disobey him are punished. Instances of this latter meaning of amr can be found throughout the Surah of Hud, for example (11: 40, 43, 58, 66, 76, 82, 94). Thus the semantic range of the word amr involves not only the descent upon the Messenger of God of Divine revelation but also the imposition upon people of an obligation to accept the revelation, such that if they refuse, there is a consequent punishment.
In Baha'u'llah's Kitab-i-Iqan, one finds the same range of meanings for the word amr. Regarding Noah, for example, it is stated:
When He was invested with the robe of Prophethood, and was moved by the Spirit of God to arise and proclaim His Cause [amr], whoever believed in Him and acknowledged His Faith, was endowed with the grace of a new life. (Iqan 154)
This meaning of amr becomes of significance for Baha'i polemic in the interpretation of Qur'an 32:5 which states:
He [God] establishes al-amr from heaven to earth and it will return to Him in a Day, the length of which is one thousand years in your reckoning
If we now take these points back to the disagreement between Cole and Saeidi, the critical distinction that becomes evident in connection with the meaning of the word amr is the distinction between that of merely being the bearer of a revelation and that of imposing upon people the obligation of abandoning the previous revelation and accepting the new revelation. Revelation (wahy) and amr are thus two separate conditions which do not necessarily co-exist. It is possible to have wahy without amr (although not, I think, amr without wahy). In other words, it would appear that for a period of time while was he was in Baghdad, Baha'u'llah was the conscious bearer of a revelation but that he chose not to openly declare this fact and thus impose upon the people the necessity of choosing whether to accept his new revelation or not. During the entirety of the Baghdad period, therefore, the amr of the Bab held sway - the obligation of people was to accept and follow the religion of the Bab.
I assume that both Cole and Saeidi would agree that in 1857 and indeed during the whole of the Baghdad period, Baha'u'llah was not advancing a claim to revelation in such a way as to challenge and oblige those with whom he was in contact (mainly the Babis) to follow him. If there is agreement on that, then given the full meaning of the word amr, he was not putting forward an amr. In other words, regardless of whether we accept Cole's claim that Baha'u'llah did not in 1857 envisage advancing a claim to divine revelation and that his thinking only developed later in this direction or we accept Saeidi's contention that Baha'u'llah was fully aware of his station as a revelator of God's Will and was indeed hinting at this in his writings, the phrase "hich iqbal bih amri nadaram." has no bearing on this issue. Even if Cole is correct in translating it as "I make no claim to a Cause," this would still be in accordance with Saeidi's view that Baha'u'llah was fully aware of his station and was hinting at it in his writings. Given the full meaning of the word amr, even if Baha'u'llah were fully aware of his station, he was not at this time proclaiming it and calling people to follow him. Thus the amr - the obligation to follow Baha'u'llah and God's judgement upon them depending on the decision they made - had not yet been laid upon people.
Baha'u'llah's Messianic Concealment and Theophanic Disclosure
Christopher Buck (Symbol and Secret, Kalimat, 1995, pp. 257 ff), Juan Cole ("The Book of the River" and "Baha'u'llah's Surah of the Companions: An Early Edirne Tablet of Declaration, c. 1864: Introduction and Provisional Translation," Baha'i Studies Bulletin, vol. 5, no. 3- vol. 6, no. 1, June 1991, pp. 4-74, see p. 8, 10, 21) and others have written of Baha'u'llah's Baghdad period as being that of "messianic secrecy" or of "a messianic secret". This term reflects Baha'u'llah's own description of this period, the "set time of concealment" (see Shoghi Effendi, God Passes By, Wilmette: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1970, p. 151). MacEoin appears to believe that during this period, Baha'u'llah had no messianic secret and that the idea of putting forward a claim occurred to Baha'u'llah only in about the beginning of 1863. MacEoin believes the accounts of Baha'u'llah's experience in the Siyah Chal (and possibly also the Ridvan Garden) to be a retrospective rewriting of history in order to conform to certain Shi`i and Shaykhi expectations about the year 1269 and 1280 (MacEoin, "Religious Authority Claims in Middle Babism", paper written for Third Annual Los Angeles Baha'i History Conference). Initially Cole disputed MacEoin's position and asserted that even in Baha'u'llah's earliest works, such as the Rashh-i `Ama and the Qasidah al-Warqa'iyyah, which date from Baha'u'llah's Tehran and Sulaymaniyyah period respectively, Baha'u'llah was signalling that his true station was that of being the bearer of a revelation and a number of individuals realised this station during the Baghdad period (Cole, "Baha'u'llah and the Naqshbandi Sufis in Iraq, 1854-1856", From Iran East and West, Studies in Babi and Baha'i History, vol. 2, Los Angeles: Kalimat Press, 1984, pp. 1-28). More recently, Cole has gone back from this position and now states that he considers that Baha'u'llah reached a consciousness of a Divine mission in between about 1857 and 1859 (Cole, "The Book of the River").
It seems to the present writer that, given the fact that the references to denying an amr are not relevant to this issue, as indicated above, we are left with the supporting evidence that Saeidi has presented (as described above - Baha'u'llah's use of the word "revelation (wahy)" in relation to his Siyah Chal experience and the instances where Baha'u'llah has stated that his revelation arose in the year Nine), which Cole has not countered. Cole's reference to Baha'u'llah denying the performance of miracles at the beginning of the Sahifih-yi-Shattiyyih would not seem to be relevant since Baha'u'llah dismissed the importance of miracles throughout the whole of his ministry. And in any case, if the amr of the Bab still held sway during the whole of the Baghdad period, then it would not surprise us to find Baha'u'llah expressing this fact in various ways.
An additional point that needs to be made here is that, according to Shi`i traditions, the Imams, who receive inspiration (ilham), only hear this inspiration, whereas a Messenger of God (rasul) who receives revelation (wahy), sees the Angel who delivers the revelation (see Momen, Introduction to Shi`i Islam, New Haven, 1985, pp. 149-50). The fact that Baha'u'llah reports seeing the Maid of Heaven is in itself a strong indication that he considered that he was in receipt of a revelation (wahy) rather than merely inspiration (ilham).
There seems to be no good grounds for accepting MacEoin's assertion that this was all rewriting of history by Baha'u'llah and so, unless Cole can produce some grounds for refuting this evidence, it would appear reasonable to accept Baha'u'llah's statements regarding the significance of the Siyah Chal and Ridvan episodes at their face value, which more or less corresponds to the traditional Baha'i interpretation as given by Shoghi Effendi in God Passes By. This would then divide the life of Baha'u'llah theologically into three stages:
1. The period before the onset of revelation, which Baha'u'llah describes by the words "I was but a man like others, asleep . . ." (Proclamation of Baha'u'llah, 57) and which `Abdu'l-Baha expounds as meaning that although the Manifestation of God in the Manifestation from birth, his mission is not activated until a particular time (Some Answered Questions, Wilmette, 1990, 155-6).
2. The period during which revelation (wahy) is present but no claim had been advanced that represented the imposition of amr upon the people, the messianic concealment.
3. The period during which both amr and revelation are present, the theophanic disclosure, following which the laws of the new religion are given.
Incidentally, we have evidence from as early as 1867 that the ordinary Baha'is understood this concept that Baha'u'llah had revealed himself gradually. In a letter written in 1867 by the Baha'i community of Baghdad to the United States Congress, we have the following statement regarding Baha'u'llah: "That wise man revealed himself till he appeared like the high sun in midday." (E-Mail posting by Robert Stauffer, 4 Jun 1997)
Although the broad outline of these three stages in Baha'u'llah's life are now clear, the exact dating of these stages is not as clear-cut as one may think. Although the onset of revelation is generally regarded as having started with the appearance of the Maid of Heaven to Baha'u'llah in the Siyah-Chal, sometime between September 1852 and January 1853, this does not fully take into account the episode of Baha'u'llah's meeting with Shaykh Hasan Zunuzi in Karbala in 1851. Nabil Zarandi, who appears to have known Shaykh Hasan personally, records that Baha'u'llah confided to Shaykh Hasan "the secret that He was destined to reveal at a later time in Baghdad" (Nabil's Narrative, p. 593). Now it may be that since the claim put forward by Baha'u'llah to Shaykh Hasan was that of being the return of the Imam Husayn (Nabil's Narrative, p. 32), this did not necessarily imply a claim to revelation. It does, however, mean that Baha'u'llah was communicating some inkling of a higher station earlier than 1852. Similarly, the date for the end of this period of messianic secrecy is not exactly defined. It is clear from the statements of Baha'u'llah that he made some form of claim to a small number of his companions in the Garden of Ridvan in April 1863. But at what point in time can it be said that the amr - the obligation to follow Baha'u'llah - had been laid upon the people? Was it in April 1863, when only a small number were informed and there appears to have been no attempt to spread this news, or in 1864 when a few tablets written by Baha'u'llah begin to make his claim to authority clear, or in 1866-7, when he began to send individuals to Iran to propagate his claim to the Babis and at the same time he openly challenged Mirza Yahya, who was widely acknowledged as the head of the Babi community, or should we, for theological reasons, delay this until the period of Baha'u'llah's proclamation to the kings and rulers of the world in 1868-72 (the kings and rulers acting in a sense as proxies for their people)?
During the years when Baha'u'llah lived in Baghdad, he "appeared in the guise of, and continued to labour as, one of the foremost disciples of the Bab" (Shoghi Effendi, God Passes By, p.128). The main thrust of his activities were towards reforming and purifying the Babi community. A significant number of individuals are, however, reported as having come to realise that he occupied a much higher station. These are said to have come to this conclusion either from reading his writings (see Momen, "A Preliminary Survey of the Baha'i Community in Iran during the Nineteenth Century", in Iran im 19.Jahrhundert und die Entstheung der Baha'i Religion, ed. Christoph Burgel and Isabel Schayani, Hildesheim, 1998, p. 34, no.3) or from meeting him (for example Nabil Akbar, Shams-i Jahan Khanum Fitnih, and Mirza Fath-`Ali Khan Fath-i-A`zam, see also list of twelve persons who became enthusiastic followers of Baha'u'llah in Momen, "A Preliminary Survey," p. 34, n.4).
Following the open declaration of his mission in 1863-8, Baha'u'llah began to reveal the new laws of his dispensation, most particularly in the Kitab al-Aqdas, followed by the new social teachings of his religion, in a series of important tablets revealed after the Aqdas. Baha'u'llah himself links the theophanic disclosure and the imposition of the amr upon the people with the revelation of a new law in the following passage from the Tablet to `Abdu'r-Razzaq, referring to the rejection of Baha'u'llah by the Azalis:
And when the Cause (amr) of God was revealed and the laws, by which the entirety of the Bayan was confirmed and upon which it is dependent, were promulgated, they then pushed these aside, as you have seen and heard. (Iqtidarat va chand lawh-i digar, p. 52)
In summary then, we may discern three periods to the life of Baha'u'llah and two periods to the ministry of Baha'u'llah. There was initially a period when, although there are some hagiographical accounts of wonders in his childhood and youth, there is nothing to indicate that he put forward any claim or was in receipt of any special divine guidance. From 1844 onwards, he acted as one of the followers of the Bab. Then came the first phase of his ministry, a period of messianic concealment, during which Baha'u'llah was in receipt of revelation (wahy) but had not yet openly advanced a claim, which would have laid the obligation of acceptance, the amr, upon the people. This period lasted from roughly 1852 to 1863, but may, for the Babis of Iran have extended to 1867. During this period also, Baha'u'llah acted as one of the followers of the Bab. The second phase of his ministry, and the third period of his life, was the period of theophanic disclosure, which was initiated with the Declaration in the Garden of Ridvan in 1863 but only gradually attained its full force as Baha'u'llah successively disclosed his claim to the Babi community in 1866-7 and to the rest of the world in 1868-72. This was the period when both amr and wahy were present.
The Ministry of the Bab
Having outlined a schema for the life and ministry of Baha'u'llah, I would now like to see in what way this can be overlaid onto the life and ministry of the Bab. In Babi-Baha'i history the start of the ministry of the Bab is usually stated to start from his declaration to Mulla Husayn Bushru'i on the evening of 22 May 1844. The exact equivalent in the life of the Bab to Baha'u'llah's experience of the Maid of Heaven in the Siyah-Chal is however dated by the Bab to have occurred about 2 months before. In the Kitab al-Haramayn, the Bab writes:
In truth, the first day that the Spirit descended in the heart of this slave was the fifteenth of the month of Rabi`u'l‑Avval [1260, i.e. 4 April 1844]. (Nicolas, Seyyed Ali Mohammed, Paris, 1905, p. 206)
This may correspond to the vision that the Bab describes of the severed head of the Imam Husayn. This vision is described by the Bab in one of his writings which is quoted in Nabil's Narrative:
In one of His writings revealed in the year '60 A.H., the Bab declares the following: "The spirit of prayer which animates My soul is the direct consequence of a dream which I had in the year before the declaration of My Mission. In My vision I saw the head of the Imam Husayn, the Siyyidu'sh‑Shuhada', which was hanging upon a tree. Drops of blood dripped profusely from His lacerated throat. With feelings of unsurpassed delight, I approached that tree and, stretching forth My hands, gathered a few drops of that sacred blood, and drank them devoutly. When I awoke, I felt that the Spirit of God had permeated and taken possession of My soul. My heart was thrilled with the joy of His Divine presence, and the mysteries of His Revelation were unfolded before My eyes in all their glory." (Nabil's Narrative 253)
This vision may also correspond to the episode related by Khadijih Bigum, the wife of the Bab, in which she saw the Bab one night intoning a prayer: "His face was luminous; rays of light radiated from it. He looked so majestic and resplendent that fear seized me." Later the Bab said to her: "It was the will of God that you should have seen Me in the way you did last night, so that no shadow of doubt should ever cross your mind, and you should come to know with absolute certainty that I am the Manifestation of God Whose advent has been expected for a thousand years. This light radiates from My heart and from My being" (H.M. Balyuzi, Khadijih Bigum, Oxford 1981, 11-13).
The claim that is explicitly made, however, in the first chapter of the Qayyum al-Asma, which the Bab wrote in the presence of Mulla Husayn on 23 May 1844 was that of being the Gate to the Hidden Imam. In all of the books written in the early years of his ministry, the Bab never makes any explicit claim to any higher station. He also does not abrogate the law of Islam - indeed he urges his followers to be meticulous in carrying out the Islamic law (Tablet to Tahirih, cited in Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, Tehran, n.d., vol. 3, p. 334). Thus just as Baha'u'llah, in his early years, appears to be a reformer and purifier of the religion of the Bab, so the Bab, in these early years appears as a reformer and purifier of Islam. Within the Shaykhi community to whom the Bab and the Letters of the Living predominantly addressed themselves in the early years, the Bab appeared to be a leader in succession to Sayyid Kazim. Even the title of "the Bab" was not exceptional as Shaykh Ahmad and Sayyid Kazim had occasionally been known by this title.
The Bab did not proclaim his full identity as the Mahdi and the revealer of a new revelation until the summer of 1848. At this time, two events occurred almost simultaneously. First, those attending the conference of Badasht heard Tahirih and Baha'u'llah proclaim that the Islamic dispensation had ended. Second, the Bab declared himself to be the Mahdi at his trial before the Crown Prince Nasiru'd-Din Mirza at Tabriz. It was perhaps not the declaration of being the Mahdi itself which was the decisive issue for the matter under consideration in this paper, since Muslims commonly expected that the Mahdi would follow Islam and would not bring a new revelation. It was rather that during the trial, the Bab claimed that he was revealing divine verses, and this was discussed at length by the `ulama present. Immediately after this, the Bab wrote the Persian Bayan in which he abrogated the laws of Islam and promulgated his own laws.
Prior to these episodes in the summer of 1848, many, possibly most, of the Babis thought that the Bab was merely claiming to be an Islamic leader, a leader of the Shaykhi sect, the gate to the Hidden Imam. This was what he appeared to be claiming in his writings and this is the evident meaning of the title of "Bab" that he had taken. There is evidence for this assertion in the fact that when the Bab's full claims became known at the conference of Badasht, there were some who left the Babi movement as a result. Some of those attending the conference apostatised and left and we are told that in Maraghih, where most of the Shaykhis had become Babis, they apostatised when they learned that the Bab had abrogated the laws of Islam (Mazandarani, Zuhur al-Haqq, vol.3, p. 58).
There were also many, however, who realised, before the summer of 1848, that the Bab's claim was far higher than that of merely being a gate to the Hidden Imam. As early as the first year of the Bab's ministry, Sunni and Shi`i `ulama gathered at the trial of Mulla `Ali Bastami in Baghdad perceived that while the text of the Qayyum al-Asma may claim that its author is the gate to the Hidden Imam, the language, through use of such terms as wahy and nuzul, in fact denoted a claim to divine revelation. If Sunni and Shi`i `ulama could discern that there lay a claim to revelation, a claim to a station equivalent to that of the prophet Muhammad, behind the text of the Bab, we can be sure that the leading disciples of the Bab also did. They were, after all, educated in exactly the esoteric tradition of Shaykhism that was most informed about such subtleties. Some of these leading Babis were more explicit in revealing their discovery of his high station (for example Tahirih), while others kept the knowledge hidden. I have discussed this theme in more detail in a paper regarding the trial of Mulla `Ali Bastami ("The Trial of Mulla `Ali Bastami: a combined Sunni-Shi`i fatwa against the Bab." Iran vol. 20, 1982, pp. 113-43).
We may therefore see that, just as with Baha'u'llah, when the main body of the Babis during the Baghdad period saw Baha'u'llah as an inspiring leader but still basically within the circle of Babism, so during the early years of the ministry of the Bab, the majority of the Babis probably conceived of the Bab as a Shaykhi leader, as a gateway to the Hidden Imam who is the true Lord of the Age. However, just as there were some leading Babis who recognized, either from meeting him or reading his writings in the Baghdad period, that Baha'u'llah's true claim and station were far higher, so also there were undoubtedly a group of the followers of the Bab in the early years who recognised, either from his writings or from meeting him that his claim was much greater. We could say that just as during the Baghdad period, the amr still lay with the Bab and the people were not yet called upon to believe in Baha'u'llah as the purveyor of a new religion from God, abrogating the religion of the Bab, so from May 1844 to July 1848, the amr still lay with Muhammad and the generality of the people were not yet called upon to believe in the Bab as the bearer of a new religion from God. The period of May 1844 to July 1848, thus become a period of messianic concealment, which ended with the theophanic disclosure occasioned by Tahirih's proclamation at the conference of Badasht and the Bab's declaration at his trial that he was the Mahdi and the author of a new revelation.
Continuing the parallels, we might point out that just as there are statements in the writings of Baha'u'llah during the Baghdad period denying that he was possessed of any amr and appearing to subordinate himself to the authority of the Bab and the Babi hierarchy (as in the Sahifih-yi-Shattiyyih), so there are similar statements of the Bab in these early years. There is for example the episode in the Masjid-iVakil in Shiraz, when his enemies had forced the Bab to issue a recantation of his claims. There are several versions of this episode. Nabil gives the following:
The Bab, as He faced the congregation, declared: "The condemnation of God be upon him who regards me either as a representative of the Imam or the gate thereof. The condemnation of God be also upon whosoever imputes to me the charge of having denied the unity of God, of having repudiated the prophethood of Muhammad, the Seal of the Prophets, of having rejected the truth of any of the messengers of old, or of having refused to recognise the guardianship of `Ali, the Commander of the Faithful, or of any of the imams who have succeeded him." (Nabil's Narrative 154)
The following is an alternative account of the Bab's words which occurs in a letter written by Sayyid Husayn Katib, the Bab's amanuensis:
O people! Whoever believes in my prophethood (nubavvat), may the curse of God be upon him. Whoever considers that I am an appointed gate (bab-i mansus) sent by the grace of the [Hidden] Imam (upon him be peace), may the curse of God be upon him. I am but a servant, believing in God and in his verses. (Quoted in A.Q. Afnan, Zindigani-yi Hadrat-i Bab 167)
And yet another account exists from Haji Mirza Muhammad Sadiq, who was not a believer in the Bab:
O people! Know ye that I have not said anything that my ancestor the Messenger of God did not say. That which Muhammad has made permissible [in the Holy Law] is permissible until the Day of Resurrection (yawm al-qiyama) and that which Muhammad has made illicit is illicit until the Day of Resurrection. As the Immaculate [Imam] (upon him be peace) has said: When the Qa'im arises, that is the Resurrection. (Quoted in A.Q. Afnan, Zindigani-yi Hadrat-i Bab 168)
In the Sahifih-yi `Adliyyah and other writings from this period, the Bab also denies any new revelation and commands the people to follow the laws of the Qur'an and the teachings of Muhammad.
The parallels between the Bab and Baha'u'llah can even be extended to the ways in which they made their full claim known - the manner of the theophanic disclosure. Baha'u'llah proclaimed his full station in three ways. First privately to a small group of his followers in the Garden of Ridvan, openly to the Babis in the early years of the Edirne period, and then to the peoples of the world through their kings and rulers in the late Edirne, early Akka period. The full station of the Bab was declared to the Babis at the conference of Badasht and it was proclaimed to the Crown Prince and leading religious figures of Tabriz at his trial. The Bab at this time also wrote to the Shah of Iran and the Prime Minister Haji Mirza Aqasi. There is even a parallel to the private Ridvan Garden declaration of Baha'u'llah in the declaration by the Bab that he was the Qa'im to one of his foremost disciples `Azim shortly before his public declaration at his trial (Nabil's Narrative 313). The fact that even a leading disciple such as `Azim, who mixed freely with the Babis in Tehran and Adharbayjan, was perturbed by this claim at this late date is further evidence that the realisation of the full station of the Bab was not very widespread among the Babis prior to the summer of 1848.
In his book, the Seven Proofs, the Bab explains that the need for a period of messianic concealment and the gradual unfoldment of his claims arose out of the lack of capacity among the people to accept his full claim at the start of his mission and out of a desire to assist people to gradually come to a full realisation of the magnitude of the his claim:
Consider the manifold favours vouchsafed by the Promised One, and the effusions of His bounty which have pervaded the concourse of the followers of Islam to enable them to attain unto salvation. Indeed observe how He Who representeth the origin of creation, He Who is the Exponent of the verse, `I, in very truth, am God', identified Himself as the Gate [Bab] for the advent of the promised Qa'im, a descendant of Muhammad, and in His first Book enjoined the observance of the laws of the Qur'an, so that the people might not be seized with perturbation by reason of a new Book and a new Revelation and might regard His Faith as similar to their own, perchance they would not turn away from the Truth and ignore the thing for which they had been called into being.(Selections from the Writings of the Bab, Haifa, 1976, p. 110).
Baha'u'llah has recapitulated and expanded on this in a tablet written to Aqa Mirza Aqa Nuru'd-Din:
Thou art well aware that the Commentary on the Ahsan al-Qisas (the Qayyum al-Asma of the Bab) was revealed according to what was current among the people (bi ma `ind an-nas) and this was purely out of bounty and grace that haply the people of negligence and error may ascend to the heaven of knowledge (jabarut-i `ilm). Thus most of what is mentioned in that book is what has been accepted as truth among the Muslims (ahl al-furqan). If what was the Will of God had been sent down from the start, no-one would have been able to bear it and no-one would have remained. All of this is out of His grace and bounty towards His creatures. Observe that at the start of his ministry, that holy one revealed himself in the station of gatehood (babiyyat). This was out of consideration that the birds of the hearts of humanity were not capable of flying above that station . . . The people have been and will continue to be immersed in the ocean of idle fancies and veiled from what God doth will, except those whom God has delivered through His Grace and whom He has caused to recognise what He hath revealed through His command . . . Thus out of grace to them, the Sun of Truth occupied himself with uttering trivia and the Ancient Ocean spoke forth only droplets. Thus it is that the Primal Point hath appeared in the name of gatehood (babiyyat), and the people did not accept even this limited station, let alone any mention of guardianship (lordship, vilayat) and such matters. And this despite the fact that all of these stations and those beyond them have been revealed and come into existence by a single word out of the ocean of his bounty and by his command they also return to annihilation and oblivion. (Quoted in A.Q. Afnan, Zindigani-yi Hadrat-i Bab 203-4)
Finally, in a tablet which appears to date from the Edirne period, the Surat al-Fath, Baha'u'llah restates this theme and draws the parallels between the Bab's gradually unfolding claims and his own initial concealment of his claims. First, he describes the gradual unfoldment of the claims of the Bab:
So recollect, O people! The moment when there came unto you the Revealer of the Bayan with wondrous, holy verses. At that time he said: "I am the Gate of Knowledge (bab al-`ilm) and whoever asserts more than that in relation to me has assuredly invented lies about me and has sinned greatly." Then later he said "I am the Qa'im, the True One, whose manifestation you were promised in mighty, noble scrolls." Then he said, magnified be his utterance, "I, verily, am the Primal Point. And this is, in reality, Muhammad, the messenger of God, the same [person] as thou hast heard and witnessed in the tablets of God, the King, the Ruler." And when the beings of a number of souls had progressed [sufficiently], thereupon, the veils were torn asunder and, from the Dawning-Place of holiness, there rose up [the call]: "I verily am God, no God is there except Me, thy Lord and the Lord of all the worlds." And also: "I, verily, from the beginning which hath no beginning, was a divinity, the One, the Single, the Unique. I did not take unto myself any partner or likeness or deputy. I verily sent the prophets and the Messengers from all eternity and will continue to send them to all eternity" . . .
Then in this tablet, Baha'u'llah comments on the gradual unfoldment of his own claims, mentions explicitly that there was a time during which he elevated the name of his brother and was submissive before the authoritative figures in the Babi movement, and clearly indicates that the amr did not lie with him in those days:
By God, O people! I did not desire any Cause (amr) for myself and followed all the Manifestations of old. I supported the Cause (amr) of God in every way during the days when faces were concealed out of fear of the oppressors. I humbled myself before every soul in the Bayan and lowered the wing of submission before every worthy believer. I safeguarded my brother [Mirza Yahya] . . . and elevated his name among the servants of God . . . There was none of the people of the Bayan for whom I did not reveal a tablet in which I mentioned him with high praise. Every fair-minded and trustworthy person will bear witness to this. (Based on a translation by Stephen Lambden in "Some Notes on Baha'u'llah's Gradually Evolving Claims of the Adrianople/Edirne Period," Bulletin of Baha'i Studies, vol. 5.3-6.1, June 1991, 75-83, see pp. 79-80; here retranslated from the original manuscript, an unnumbered volume from the Iranian Baha'i National Archives, pp. 77-79)
Conclusion
The thesis of this paper is that the phenomenon of a period of messianic concealment followed by a theophanic disclosure is common to at least the Bab and Baha'u'llah (and a case can be made for a similar phenomenon in the life of Jesus and Muhammad). The period of messianic concealment appears to be a period when although the Manifestation is in receipt of divine revelations, these are phrased in such a way as to conceal their identity as revelation. Since no claim to being the bearer of a new revelation and the inaugurator of a new religious dispensation is made by the Manifestation during this time, there is no obligation on the people to follow the Manifestation, although a small number do discern the reality of the Manifestation. During this period, the amr still belongs to the previous Manifestation. At some point however, the new Manifestation discloses his true nature and puts forward the claim to be the inaugurator of a new religion. This disclosure is made both to the followers of the previous religion and to the secular authorities. This theophanic disclosure now puts an obligation on all to follow the new Manifestation. A new amr has begun. Following this the new Manifestation begins to reveal the new laws and teachings associated with his dispensation. Baha'u'llah has given something of the reason for this particular strategy in the case of the Bab and it is probable that much the same applies to the case of Baha'u'llah himself. Baha'u'llah states that the reason for the messianic concealment was that the people of the previous religion were not able to bear the full disclosure of the new Manifestation. Therefore the station of that Manifestation was revealed to them gradually.
NOTE
This paper was presented at the Newcastle Baha'i Studies Seminar, 11-13 January 2002. I am grateful to Stephen Lambden and Ismael Velasco for pointing out, in the discussion following the presentation of this paper, the references to the Surat al-Fath and Lawh-i-`Abdu'r-Razzaq respectively, material which I have now incorporated into the paper.
A Note on the Year Five of the Ministry of the Bab
I have recently been translating for the forthcoming Irfan Colloquium the Bab's commentary on the Verse of Light. I was interested to see in this the same prophecy regarding the fifth year of his ministry that also occurs in the Seven Proofs. This prophecy emerges from the Bab's interpretation of the Tradition of Kumayl. In response to the question "What is reality?", the Imam `Ali responded by a series of enigmatic statements.
In both the Seven Proofs and the Commentary on the Verse of Light, the Báb gives an interpretation of this Tradition, emphasising in particular the fifth phrase in this Tradition, which he relates to the fifth year of his ministry. In the Seven Proofs, the Bab merely prophesies that in that year "you will see a light shining from the morn of eternity if you do not flee and are not disturbed." But in the Commentary on the Verse of Light, he gives some indication of what will happen in that year. He begins by quoting the Tradition and then going on to expand on the fifth phrase:
Verily in the first year, there hath appeared the uncovering of the clouds of glory without a sign (min ghayr alBishara; "Piercing the veils of glory, unaided" - Kitab Iqan, p. 164); then the obliteration of vain imaginings and the dawning of the known; then the rending of the veils for the overthrow of the secret; then the attraction of the primal unity for the attributes of the Divine Oneness; then a light dawning forth from the morn of pre-eternity upon the temples of unity (cf Shoghi Effendi translates a slightly different phrase as "Behold, a light hath shone forth out of the Morn of eternity, and lo! its waves have penetrated the inmost reality of all men." Iqan 102). And when it has entered upon the five [?fifth year], its effect is that the fire becomes a light. At that moment, the form is completed and, verily, the form of the five is the form of a human being. Its creation is not completed for five years just as we sent to thee thy form.
The meaning of the passage is not entirely clear, but what is clear is that the Bab was signalling that some process that was begun at the start of his ministry would come to fruition in the fifth year and it would come to fruition in a human form.
Now since the fifth phrase of the Tradition of Kumayl reads: "a light dawning forth from the morn of pre-eternity (subh-i azal)," the Azalis have long asserted that this is a prophecy of the arising of Azal in the fifth year of the ministry of the Bab. However, there are problems with this assertion.
First, it is not at all clear that Azal was ever known as Subh-i Azal until a much later period. Mirza Yahya was addressed as Azal in tablets of the Bab, on account of the fact that his name Yahya and Azal are numerically equivalent (=38). However, I have not seen anywhere that the Bab addresses him as Subh-i Azal, and this statement is supported by Ishraq-Khavari (see Qamus-i Iqan vol. 4, p. 1830). It is probable that either he himself or, more likely, some of his followers such as the authors of the Hasht Bihist, Shaykh Ahmad Ruhi and Mirza Aqa Khan Kirmani, began to give him this appellation precisely in order to make him retrospectively fit the prophecy of the Bab related to the Tradition of Kumayl. The Nuqtatu'l-Káf perhaps marks an intermediate stage in the development of this line of Azali thought in that, although the link between Azal and the Tradition of Kumayl is made (p. 208), nevertheless, Mirza Yahya is never called Subh-i Azal in this text. He is always referred to as Jinab-i Azal or Hadrat-i Azal.
Second, we have another exegesis by the Bab of the Kumayl Tradition in the Kitab al-Asma (INBA 29, p. 401). Here, referring to the fifth phrase in the Tradition, he states: "Verily, the Primal Point is the Sun of Eternity (azal)." This would indicate that he considered himself to be the referent in this phrase of the Tradition of Kumayl.
Following on from my paper on "Messianic Concealment and Theophanic Disclosure", I would venture to suggest that what the Bab was predicting in the Seven Proofs and the Commentary on the Verse of Light was in fact the fruition of his ministry in its fifth year through his open proclamation of the station of qa'imiyyat and mazhariyyat (the end of the period of messianic concealment). Thus, in the words of the Commentary, the Divine Light that was pre‑existent in Muhammad and `Ali (which is a Shi`i Tradition to which the Bab also refers in this Commentary) will, in the year 5, become incarnated in a human being ‑ the light becomes flesh!
Almost every great philosopher and social scientist has had something to say about religion ‑‑ about its origins, its social function or its structures. It is clearly impossible therefore to describe all of these theories. In this chapter, we will concentrate on a small number of those whose writings focus on religion and whose ideas are influential today in the forming of ideas about religion. We will not have space to deal with those who treat religion as a side‑issue to their main line of argument, as Marx does for example. Some of what follows are theories about religion itself while others are theoretical approaches to the study of religion. However, a theoretical approach to the study of religion will usually presuppose or imply a theory of the nature of religion. Therefore, the two are not clearly distinct and will be dealt with together in this chapter. Various typologies of religious groups that have been suggested are also examined in this chapter. Finally, we will look at one aspect of the debate that has gone on regarding the proper approach to religious studies.
Theories of Religion
A. Sociology and Anthropology
1. Functionalism
2. Structuralism
3. Historical/Interpretative Sociology
B. Psychological
1. Analytical Freudian Psychology
2. Jungian Psychology
C. Philosophical and Historical
1. History of Religion
2. Phenomenology of Religion
E. Theological and Normative Theories
1. Justificatory or polemical
2. Evolutionary
3. Relativist
As mentioned in the Introduction, it is useful to view religion from a multi‑disciplinary approach. The different theories of religion that we will be exploring in this chapter arise from these different disciplines. They therefore reflect to an extent the problem of the current fragmented approach to the study of religion. Not all of these theories are however rivals to each other. Some are looking at different aspects of religion from others, while some are looking at different types of religion from others. Thus, for example, anthropological theories of religion tend to relate to local tribal religions. They are often concerned with explaining phenomena such as p2 totemism since these are the types of manifestations of religion with which an anthropologist comes into contact. Such theories may or may not have any relevance to the major world religions. Similarly, there is no inherent reason why a sociological and a philosophical theory of religion should be mutually exclusive.
A. Sociology and Anthropology
Religious studies is a relatively new academic field. Previously and to a large extent still, much of the academic study of religion was undertaken under several different academic disciplines. Two disciplines that have been much concerned with observing and analysing religion from the nineteenth century onwards are sociology and anthropology. Several theories have emerged from these studies.
1. Functionalism
Functionalism is a theory that is bound up with the view that all phenomena in a system are inter‑related. A change in one element of the system will, therefore, have consequences for all other elements in the system. Thus, according to this viewpoint, religion may be p4 understood adequately by treating it in terms of its social function ‑‑ its objective consequence for the social system of which it is part. Functionalism is thus based on an organic analogy ‑‑ that every part of society plays some role in the social life of the community in the same way as an organ plays a part in the life of an organism. The role of the scholar is to determine and describe the function that each part performs that enables the smooth and efficient operation of the whole.
Functionalism was developed by Emile Durkheim (1858‑1917) in explicit opposition to psychological theories that sought to explain religion in terms of factors relating to the individual. For Durkheim, religion is a social phenomenon and the explanation of it has to be sought at the social level.
Durkheim considered that the critical social function of religion is to act as both a glue and a lubricant to the social process. It is a glue in the sense that it binds the individual firmly to the society. It is a lubricant in that, by providing legitimation and authority for the social structure and the moral order, it facilitates the smooth functioning of society.
In his principal book, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (1912), Durkheim writes that the crucial factor in the social functioning of religion is its division of the world into the sacredand the profane. Religion deals with sacred things ‑‑ "things set apart and forbidden (p. 47)". Therefore, Durkheim considers ritual at least as important as beliefs in the social p5 functioning of religion. Ritual emphasises and re‑enforces the dependence of the individual on the society.
By thus creating a separate area of life with special properties and powers, religion establishes the authority with which to reinforce the moral dictates of society. In effect, religion acts as the mechanism for the imposition of the authority of society. This leads us on to the most radical aspect of Durkheim's theories. Many anthropologists thought that humanity's sense of awe at the forces of nature was the origins of the concept of gods. Durkheim, however, asserted that the sense of something transcendent or supernatural arose out of our experience of society‑‑the fact that a social group has a living reality independent of the individuals that compose it. This reality may be experienced most intensively when the social group gathers to perform a ritual. Thus the idea of God or a god arose as a secondary phenomenon and is in effect the embodiment of the social entity. In other words that by worshipping God or a god, human beings are really worshipping (and hence reaffirming their commitment to) society (pp. 206, 226).
Although himself an atheist, Durkheim denied that he was trying to invalidate religion. Indeed he considered that all religions "are true in their own fashion; all answer, though in different ways, to the given conditions of human existence (p. 3)."
Later functionalists have included the anthropologist, Bronislaw Malinowski (1884‑1942). In his principal book, Magic, Science and Religion, and p6 other essays (1948), he wrote that social phenomena such as religion fulfill a function in relation to human psychological needs. In the case of religion, this function is providing psychological safeguards against the fear of death and thus giving human beings the feeling of a mastery over their fate.
Another anthropologist, A.R. Radcliffe‑Brown (1881‑1955) concentrated on a social structural approach (not to be confused with structuralism, see next section). In his book, Structure and function in Primitive Society (1952), he analysed the structural pattern of societies with regard to their overall cohesiveness and functioning. With particular reference to religion, he was interested in the contribution that it made to the formation and maintenance of social order.
Talcott Parsons (1902‑1978) rejected, in part, Durkheim's analysis of social structures. In works such as Essays in Sociological Theory (1944), Parsons described the main function of religion as being the creation of cultural values, beliefs and symbols. He considered that patterns of culture operate in varying degrees of independence from social structure and cannot be reduced to the latter p6a as Durkheim tends to do. This approach developed into a major trend in anthropology, often called symbolist, and associated with Mary Douglas and Victor Turner. According to this view, religious beliefs are to be understood as symbolic; ritual action and belief are to be understood as forms of symbolic statement about the social order. They are expressive behaviour (rather than explanatory or intellectual activities).
Criticisms of the Functionalist position. Functionalism has been criticised on several points. It has, for example, been pointed out that functionalists have difficulty coping with the phenomenon of secularisation. If religion has a vital function in society, then why p7 has society moved towards greater secularisation? Some functionalists argue that the functions of religion survive the process of secularisation. They merely transfer to such ideologies as nationalism and communism. This, however, brings us on to another weakness of functionalist theory in relation to religion. It has been argued that functionalism has confused two separate issues. Certainly the integrative aspects of religion are vital to society; but the question is whether what is indispensable is religion itself, or merely the function of religion (i.e. social cohesion).
Furthermore, functionalists tend to view society as a united homogenous whole. There seems little recognition of the fact that almost all societies have divisions based on sex, class or ethnicity and that one section of society may use religion as a tool for the domination of other sections. Functionalists have also been criticised for being ahistorical (the functioning of a society can be understood just by examining its present and without any need to refer to its past). There is also the idea inherent in the approach of most functionalists that conclusions reached from the study of primal societies can be transposed to developed societies. In other words, they assume that religion performs the same function in every society but that this function is more transparent in primal societies and thus more accessible to investigation. This is, at the very least, a questionable assumption.p8
A number of further criticisms attach to Durkheim's work in particular. His division of the world into sacred and profane is breached in many social situations. Situations such as illness often involve responses that have elements of both the sacred and profane. There is also the fact that Durkheim stresses the function of religion in general and ritual in particular as a means for integrating the individual in society. In some tribal groups, such as Australian aborigines, however, clans meet together for ritual purposes but may live in separate communities with other clans. What then would be the point of reaffirming, through ritual, the group solidarity of a group that does not in fact live together as a social unit?
2. Structuralism
In his publications, such as Structural Anthropology (2 vols., 1963, 1973) and Introduction to a Science of Mythology (4 vols., 1969‑81), Claude Levi‑Strauss (1908‑ ) has defined the outlines of structuralism. The structuralist approach to religion involves trying to establish the meaning of religious phenomena. "Meaning" in this context, however, does not signify such simple explanatory sentences as: "Bread and wine in the Christian Mass signify the body and blood of Christ." Rather the enterprise of the structuralist involves trying to locate a deeper meaning that lies p9 behind the conscious thoughts that are going on in the mind of the participant. Structuralism, then, denies that our immediate experience of the world is a valid starting point for investigations (i.e. it rejects empiricism). Behind or beyond the visible inter‑relations of humanity lie structures that determine the form of what we observe. It is these structures that the structuralist is attempting to uncover. They are the structures of thought itself ‑‑ in particular the way in which language prefigures our processes of thinking. All social phenomena, including religion, are therefore considered to be manifestations or projections of the innate structures of the human mind.
The structuralist is in opposition to the empiricist leanings of most functionalists. The latter consider that the starting point of all enquiries is the facts and that these can be apprehended in a relatively pure form. They are thus reliable and true representations of "reality". The structuralist casts doubt on these basic assumptions of the empiricist. There are no such things as facts that can be taken as given. The mere apprehension of "facts" involves the process of ordering and organising them in accordance with the pre‑set structures of the human mind. Thus what is apprehended is not pure facts but interpretations.
To the structuralist, all rituals, religious laws and myths can be analysed in a way that reveals the workings of the mind or minds that have produced or are enacting them. All p10 manifestations of human culture, including religion, are manifestations of fundamental structures in the human mind. For example, most traditional anthropological and sociological approaches to a religious symbol would involve an analysis of its cultural context or subjective meaning. The structuralist, however, will try to determine the meaning of a symbol from its position within a pattern of relationships. The patterns that structuralists find are usually based on paired oppositions of a fairly simple kind. Thus a phenomenon may be: animate/inanimate, male/female, human/inhuman, symmetrical/asymmetrical, etc. Any cultural phenomenon can be placed at some point on such a matrix. The structuralist is thus looking at relationships among relationships.
These paired oppositions are partly the creation of our language. We think, for example, in terms of day and night as a sharp discontinuity precisely because our language encourages us to think thus. In fact, however, our experience tells us that there is continuity between the two; there is a period at dusk and dawn that is neither quite day nor quite night. The structuralist argues that because we think in terms of these bipolar discontinuities, this is reflected in the social world and culture that we build up as a result of our thought processes.
Some structuralists have indeed focused on this question of discontinuity as the key to understanding religion. They argue that religious phenomena often act as a threshold between two non‑sacred, discontinuous states. By acting as the interface between these two states, religion helps to preserve the perceived discontinuity. p11 Religious rites of passage are an obvious example of this phenomenon. They act to preserve perceived discontinuities: between childhood and adulthood, the single and married state, the married state and widowhood, etc. Religious festivals may mark out the calendar into discontinuous units.
Criticisms of structuralism. Structuralists have been criticised for the narrowness of their approach. By concentrating on the structure of the individual mind, the structuralist, in effect, denies the importance of society and of history.
There is some vagueness in the works of Levi‑Strauss as to the exact nature of the unconscious structures that he is attempting to uncover. Are they culturally‑specific classifications or socio‑economic relationships masked by myth and symbolism? This leads on to a number of other questions. Can it really be that human culture is only a projection or transformation of innate structures in the human mind? Levi‑Strauss himself creates wide‑ranging cross‑cultural analyses which are based on such an assumption. However, many have raised doubts about such an exercise: surely geographical, climatic, economic and other factors must have some bearing on the structures and models in the human mind and hence on culture.
It is difficult to see how such questions can ever be answered satisfactorily. And so the question is raised of the validity of the approach. A structuralist analysis can never be shown to be true in p12 any objective sense. It remains a rather subjective viewpoint and structuralist interpretations are often criticised for being arbitrary. Some find that much of what is presented as a result of a structuralist analysis is no more than one would have thought intuitively or by common sense anyway. However, others argue that even this is worthwhile as it provides a rational framework for intuition and common sense. Moreover, occasionally structuralist analyses throw up unexpected relationships that would not have been seen by other methods of analysis.
3. Historical/Interpretative Sociology
Both Functionalism and Structuralism are criticised for being ahistorical in their approach. Max Weber (1864‑1920) initiated a different direction in the sociology of religion by concentrating on the historical process of the development of religion. He considered that religion had evolved through three stages:
1. The first stage, naturalistic religion, was concerned primarily with magic. The magician or shaman tried to control the powers of p13 nature (rain, health, fertility, etc.) through magic. He was considered to be endowed with special powers that enabled him to do this. The name that Weber gave to this state of being considered endowed with special powers is "charisma".
2. In the second stage, animistic religion, ideas of gods and spirits develop. Religious activity is transformed from magic, which is a direct attempt to manipulate the forces of nature, into ritual, which is a symbolic activity. Two types of religious professionals arise during this phase: priests who represent the rationalisation and organisation of religion; and prophets who continue the charismatic mode by claiming the authority of personal revelation. The former hold office within a particular social order and are committed to maintaining the stability of that; the latter are agents of social discontinuity and change. In this second stage, two main types of groups emerge within religious communities. These differ in the way that they think of salvation: the first is a mystic‑contemplative group that seeks to flee from the world and stresses a cessation of thought leading to a union with Absolute Reality; the second is a world‑denying, ascetic group which rejects the world and therefore seeks to struggle with it and control it.
3. It is from the latter group that the next stage in the development of religion comes. Weber asserted that it was the concept of a transcendent single God which was important in undermining the mystic‑contemplative type in the West. This was because any thought of union p14 with such a God became blasphemous. This ascetic outlook came to the fore in the Protestantism that arose as a consequence of the Reformation. Previously asceticism had been expressed through the monastic tradition. Now the Protestant sects began to demand a world‑denying ethic of everyone. In addition, the belief in predestination among Protestant sects was the final stage in the elimination of magic from religion. If God had already decided the fate of every human being, there was no point in trying to avert one's fate by magic. The elements of magic, sentiment and tradition in religion were supplanted by explicit, rational rules and systematic procedures. This took the process of the rationalisation of religion to a new and higher level. It established religion on the basis of what Weber called "legal‑rational authority".
The most famous of Weber's works, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1930), shows how the world‑denying ethic induced by Protestantism led to the accumulation of capital among the wealthy (since money was not spent in indulging oneself). At the same time, the Protestant concept of a "calling" (a task set for the individual by God) led to a work‑force which did work for its own sake. The combination of these and other factors predisposed Protestant Europe to become the cradle for the rise of modern capitalism.
Thus, Weber sees the evolution of religion as a process of gradual rationalisation. The early stages centre on magic and orgiastic or emotive rites. These have a powerful but temporary effect on individuals. There is little effect on the individual's ethical behaviour. Rationalisation leads to the progressive elimination of magical, ritual and charismatic elements at the centre p15 of religion and their replacement by ethical rationalism. This results in a situation where the whole of an individual's life is lived within an ethical and rational framework determined by religion. There is thus a tendency in this process to demystify life and to adopt a purely utilitarian, instrumental approach towards the natural world and towards other people.
Durkheim, as we have noted above, tended to see society as a homogenous entity. Weber, on the other hand, laid a great deal of stress on what he considered to be the characteristic religious attitudes of different groupings within society. The peasantry, he maintained for example, always inclined towards magic, while the lower middle classes preferred rational, ethical religion of the congregational type. Weber linked social deprivation with an increased susceptibility to the emergence of a world‑changing prophet. He also considered that the various world religions were much influenced by those who were its main propagators. These "primary carriers", as he called them, often set the ethos for much of the rest of the religion. For Islam, the "primary carrier" was the world‑conquering warrior; for Buddhism it was the mendicant wandering monk; for Christianity, it was the itinerant journeyman.
Weber commented on many other matters in his wide‑ranging studies on religion (see for example the part of his uncompleted work, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, that has been translated under the title The Sociology of Religion). He noted a tendency for a popular religion to arise among the masses vis‑a‑vis the official religion. The popular religion usually focuses on magic and animism; the official religion emphasises rational‑legal norms. He was p16 also much concerned with the question of theodicy, the way that religions explain the existence of suffering and evil in the world.
Criticisms of Historical Sociology. It is difficult to find evidence for Weber's division of the evolution of religion into "ideal‑type" stages. There is no society in the world today in Weber's theoretical first stage of pre‑animistic magic; nor is there any evidence that it has ever existed in any society. Even the most primitive tribal groups have developed notions about spirits and deities. Furthermore, most religions which are in Weber's theoretical second stage of religious evolution incorporate large elements of magic in their ritual and myths.
Weber's analysis of the rise of capitalism in Protestant societies has been much commented upon and criticised. Perhaps the most cogent criticism stems from the fact that we have witnessed the very successful adoption of capitalism by societies in East and South‑East Asia. Yet these societies are also still very much attached to magical, traditional and mystical‑contemplative forms of religion.
Weber is also somewhat arbitrary in his classification of religious phenomena. Since he is anxious to link the rise of capitalism to the Protestant West, he sees the order in a monastic society as being rational. But the high degree of order brought about by Confucian ethics or in Islamic society, he classifies as traditional. p17 Conversely, a large element of magic and traditionalism exists in Protestant ritual and religious history, if one cares to look for it.
B. Psychological
The field of theoretical psychology that emerged at the end of the nineteenth century with the writings of Freud has historically always made the analysis and explanation of religion a central concern of its theories.
1. Analytical Freudian Psychology
Sigmund Freud (1856‑1939) produced a very pessimistic view of religion in such works as Totem and Taboo (1913) and The Future of an Illusion (1928). He used his famous formulation of the Oedipus Complex to trace the origins of religion. He postulated that, in the putative primitive society, the father, jealous of his growing sons, drove each of them away from the family as they reached a certain age. Then the sons banded together, returned, killed and ate the father (Totem and Taboo, pp. 141‑145). They were filled with remorse (for they loved and admired their father also, remembering their need for his protection in their childhood) and guilt (because of their sexual desire for the mother). So the sons attempted to neutralise these emotions by substituting certain rites and moral edicts. The rites such as sacrifice and totemism commemorated the crime by ritually re‑enacting it. p18 Freud considers the Christian Eucharist, for example, to be such a commemoration. The institution of certain taboos against incest and endogamy that are found in almost every religion expresses the guilt felt at the patricide. The guilt towards the slain father was further appeased by making the latter into a god, who is both loved and feared. The whole structure is then cloaked in the sub‑conscious so as to hide its origins. It is given permanence through being endowed with an air of inviolable sanctity. This Oedipal complex, acting within the life‑history of the individual, is responsible for the production of neuroses. Thus Freud drew a parallel between the processes that produce neuroses in the individual and the processes that produce religion in the social life of humanity.
The repressed wishes that lie in our unconscious find their way to the surface of consciousness eventually, according to Freud. But they emerge camouflaged as religious rituals and doctrines as well as religious wishes and actions. Because they are the products of repressed desires, their true source remains unapprehended by the religious person. The power and energy of religion, however, stems from the sheer pressure of repressed desires in the unconscious. Indeed repressed desires become the main source of transcendent meaning in Freud's writings ‑‑ almost a new metaphysics.
Freud also saw religion as a way of compensating for the sufferings and disappointments of life. However, Freud considered that there are other more satisfactory methods of compensation such as art. He condemned religion p19 as a compensatory mechanism because it restricts choice and adaptation. Its technique is to depress the value of life and distort the picture of the real world thus creating a delusional situation. Within this delusion, an individual may be spared a neurotic breakdown but at great cost to his or her mental and emotional development (see Civilisation and its Discontents). Thus Freud saw religion as a "universal obsessional neurosis" (The Future of an Illusion, p. 39). Religion, Freud considered, is bad for humanity. It is a danger to society because it helps to perpetuate bad social institutions; it restricts critical thinking; and, by linking ethical norms to religious doctrines, it creates the dangerous likelihood that, when the doctrines are discredited, the ethical norms will be abandoned.
It hardly need be said that there is no evidence whatsoever for Freud's postulated course of Oedipal events in humanity's distant past. Indeed anthropological evidence has been assembled to refute most of Freud's assertions. Nevertheless, this does not mean that we can ignore Freud. Freud's importance for the study of religion lies not so much with his theory of religion as with his uncovering of the realm of the unconscious and its mechanisms. Ever since the ideas of Freud became well known, students of humanity in general and of religion in particular have been left with the uneasy feeling that they are studying an illusion; that what we observe of human words and actions and what is recorded in the texts that we study are but a shadow, a distorted image, of the real causation of these phenomena lying in the unconscious. No longer can we be sure that such data as personal accounts of religious encounters, opinion p20 polls, or religious art are exactly what they appear to be. All human activity now appears to be two‑layered: an apparent, manifest, empirical content and a hidden, latent, psychological one.
2. Jungian Psychology
For a psychological theory that gives a more positive approach to religion, we must turn to Carl Jung (1875‑1961). To Freud's concepts of the conscious and unconscious mind, Jung, in books such as Psychology and Religion (1938) and The Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious(1934/1954) added a third concept: the collective unconscious. It is this last aspect of the mind that is, according to Jung, of particular importance for religion. Perhaps the best way of conceptualising the collective unconscious is to draw a parallel with our human organs: for example, the arms, legs and kidneys. Just as any individual possesses these organs in a particular form that is the common inheritance of humanity as a whole, so there are psychological structures in the mind that are also part of this collective inheritance of humanity. This psychological inheritance acts as a primordial substratum to our mental lives. It manifests itself in every instance of instinctual thought and behaviour and in the forms and categories that control these. p21
Within the collective unconscious, there exist a number of primordial archetypes or myths. These archetypes reflect the fundamental levels of human experience:
The collective unconscious contains the whole spiritual heritage of mankind's evolution, born anew in the brain structure of every individual. His conscious mind is an ephemeral phenomenon that accomplishes all provisional adaptations and orientations . . . The unconscious, on the other hand, is the source of the instinctual forces of the psyche and of the forms or categories that regulate them, namely the archetypes. All the most powerful ideas in history go back to archetypes. This is particularly true of religious ideas, but the central conceptions of science, philosophy and ethics are no exception to this rule . . . For it is the function of consciousness not only to recognize and assimilate the external world through the gateway of the senses, but to translate into visible reality the world within us .
Examples of such archetypes include the wise old man, the earth mother, the mandala (magic circle), the hero, the divine child, etc. From these archetypes in the collective unconscious, there emerge all p22 of the most powerful images and symbols that have motivated humanity, and in particular religious ones. This emergence may occur in dreams, myths, visions, religious symbolism and art. Freud saw these phenomena negatively as the result of pathological, repressed, infantile sexual urges. Jung, however, regarded the unconscious motivation produced by these phenomena as a positive healthy aspect of human life (although they also appear in pathological states such as neuroses). For Jung, this inner world of images and archetypes is just as real as the outer physical world. Indeed in a sense it is more real since it casts its interpretations on the outer world. The outer world is only seen through the eyes of the inner world.
For Jung, religion can play a positive role in human life: " Man positively needs general ideas and convictions that will give meaning to his life and enable him to find a place for himself in the universe" . Religion thus acts as a form of therapy, explaining and reconciling human beings to the pains and suffering of the world.
Criticisms of Jungian theory. Some writers have stated that the whole of Jung's structure of archetypes in the collective unconscious is an p23 unnecessary elaboration. After all, every human being goes through similar experiences: being born, having a mother, viewing the natural cycle, living and dying under the sun and moon. It is not necessary to postulate a theory of archetypes in the collective unconscious to explain the universal existence of these images and symbols.
C. Philosophical and Historical
Philosophical approaches to the study of religion have ranged from those that attempt to pursue an objective study of the history of religion to those that are more empathic (i.e. those that try to analyse religion in terms of its own categories and assumptions).
1. History of Religion
The exact methodology and limits of this field of religious investigation remain a matter of considerable discussion and disagreement. At its most fundamental level, it is the non‑theological, non‑normative commitment to the empirical task of uncovering the facts of religious history from the original sources. The basic historical methodology can be considered to consist of:
‑ examining the available data to establish the facts;
‑ induction from the facts to an explanatory or interpretative hypothesis;
‑ analysis of this hypothesis to explore its implications;p24
‑ checking the validity of these implications through assembling and examining further data.
In its wider meaning, the history of religion merges imperceptibly with the phenomenology of religion. Such writers as Mircea Eliade consider themselves as scholars in the field of the history of religion despite their basically ahistorical method. Eliade's Patterns in Comparative Religionwas, for example, originally published as Traité d'histoire des religions.
Criticism of the methodology of History of Religion. This methodology is so wide‑ranging that it is difficult to find any criticism that would hold true of any more than a few of those engaged in the field. It is often criticised, at least in the way that some practise it, for being reductionist in its results and implications. Its empiricism is often linked to a methodological positivism which has been much amended and criticised. One question that has been raised is whether we can regard the gathering of data as an uncontroversial, primary activity following which hypotheses and theories can be built up. In fact, the collection of data is itself a theory‑biased activity. In other words each stage outlined above is largely predetermined by theoretical considerations.p25
One attempt to bypass this problem has been to adjust the principle of verifiability (i.e. that, to be meaningful, all statements must be empirically verified ‑‑ or, at least, be capable of being verified) which is the usual criterion in positivism. As an alternative, Popper has suggested the principle of falsifiability (that statements are meaningful only if they can be proved false).
Both verifiability and Popper's alternative, falsifiability, are, however, of limited usefulness in considering many religious phenomena. A statement such as: "My sins are forgiven and I am saved", cannot be either verified or falsified. Therefore, according to the `scientific' methodology, it has no cognitive meaning. Yet few would doubt its intense meaningfulness to the person who makes it. By ruling such statements out of the arena of consideration, this approach leaves out large areas of the study of religion. An advocate of this method would respond that it is possible to study the impact of this statement historically and socially by this method.
The evaluation and interpretation of data is also not without problems. Religion deals with the human world and, as such, the data can often only be expressed in terms of probability rather than certainty. The evaluation of historical data involves interpretation and the construction of historical meaning. This in turn involves the use of evaluative criteria that are not deducible from the facts themselves. The nature of interpretation is such that seldom do two scholars agree to interpret the same facts in the same way. It is as though two p25a scientists were trying to decide the length of a wall using differently‑calibrated rulers.
2. Phenomenology of Religion
This is not so much a theory of religion as an approach to the study of religion. It is, however, based on the assumption that humanity's religious life is an entity in its own right and does not need to be reduced to sociological or psychological explanations. It is best p26 understood as a "neutral" description and an empathic attempt to get inside the experience itself. Unfortunately the rather subjective nature of the method has led to the term "phenomenology of religion" being appropriated by many diverse approaches. As a result the term has lost much of its definition and meaning. This description will attempt to stay as close as possible to the original concepts of the philosophical phenomenology initiated by Edmund Husserl (1859‑1938).
The phenomenological approach is in direct opposition to reductionism. It considers that the reduction of religious phenomena to social, psychological or other explanations is a false oversimplification. It is also formulated in opposition to those who want to describe some form of evolutionary scheme to religious history. For any such scheme must necessarily involve making value‑judgements. The best way of understanding such a complex phenomenon as religion is to try to get inside the religious experience itself in order to understand the intentionality of phenomena. By "intentionality" is meant that all consciousness is a consciousness of something. The phenomenologist tries to understand how the religious consciousness builds up the structure of religious phenomena.
One of the key methodological tools of the phenomenologist is "bracketing" or the phenomenological epoché. The external world must be "bracketed" or held in suspension. We must suspend our beliefs and judgements as to the truth, value or existence of particular religiousp27 phenomena. Instead, we should switch our attention to the experience itself as an impartial observer. The second key aspect of the method is einfühlung, the obtaining of an empathic understanding of the religious position of others.
By using these two methodological tools, the investigator can gain insight into essential structures of the aspect of religion under study or of religion itself. These essential structures can be identified through what Husserl termed "eidetic vision". This means the intuitive apprehension of the eidos of a phenomenon. Eidos is a Greek term that Husserl took from Plato. It signifies the "inner essence" or "whatness" of things. "Whatness" is that which answers the question "what is X?". In other words, it signifies that which is the necessary and invariant features of a phenomenon. Husserl considered that the eidos of a phenomenon can be grasped through intuition and insight, not by experience or rational thought.
One method used in particular by phenomenologists is to assemble a body of information about a particular phenomenon and then to search for its essential invariant core of meaning. The method involves discarding that which can be shown to be variable and thus not essential. Eventually one is left with a core that cannot be removed or changed without changing the essence, "whatness" or intentionality of the phenomenon. Husserl's original method involved a mental exercise of varying the factors in the mind. Most p28 phenomenologists now use historical and comparative variation as the basis of their method.
To clarify this methodology, we can look at some examples of phenomenological interpretation. Perhaps one of the most important examples of this is the book The Idea of the Holy by Rudolf Otto (1869‑1937). In this work, Otto tries to identify the essence of the religious experience which he calls the "numinous". He insists on its irreducible nature. He even goes as far as to say to his readers that they cannot conceptualise it through mere description; they need to have experienced it themselves, to some extent. (See Chapter XXX.)
Another example of one who is usually considered to have followed this approach to the study of religion is Mircea Eliade (1907‑1986). His work has also been considered in Chapters Six and Twelve (XXX). With Eliade, phenomenology steps across the line of being just a methodological tool; it becomes the basis for a theory of religion. Eliade sees the essence of the religious experience as being not so much in the encounter with the "numinous" as Otto did, but rather in religious symbols as the mediators between human beings and the sacred. Through this mediator, humanity can transcend the finite world and chronological time and experience the ultimate, meaningful, world of the sacred. The symbol is the revealer of a cosmic structure not discernible at the level of everyday experience. Eliade's books not only describe these symbols but help to show the way that they integrate disparate phenomena into a coherent system.p29
The concepts of phenomenology have evolved and altered at the hands of various scholars. Ninian Smart has developed the concept of epoché into what he terms methodological agnosticism. By this he means that the investigator of religion should conduct his or her enquiries in such a way that they presuppose neither acceptance nor denial of the truth of an ultimate transcendent reality, God. Cantwell Smith on the other hand has stressed the other main direction of phenomenology: the need to achieve empathy and understanding of what it is like to belong to a particular religious tradition; what it means to see the universe through their eyes.
Criticisms of Phenomenology. Probably the most frequent criticism of phenomenologists is that they are trying to introduce theological and other faith‑based material under the guise of an academic study of religion. It is certainly true that many of the most prominent phenomenologists, such as Gerardus van der Leeuw (1890‑1950), were also theologians. It is also true that this approach, based as it is on empathy and the viewpoint of the believer, is much more likely to find favour with those already committed to a religion. Indeed some have gone as far as to say that commitment should be part of the phenomenological method. They assert that one needs to have some degree of religious commitment oneself to be capable of empathy towards the religious experiences of others. However, the majority would say that the phenomenological epochérequires the suspension of judgement: as to whether the religious experience is valid; as top30 whether the experience is of something real or illusory; and as to the status of the metaphysical assumptions entailed in the description.
Very few now accept the traditional phenomenological view that we can achieve a state of being completely free of presuppositions. Most modern phenomenologists try to achieve a goal of identifying, clarifying and allowing for their own presuppositions.
There is in fact an inherent contradiction between the two main methodological tools of phenomenology. The objectivity implied in the process of "bracketing", epoché, contrasts with the subjectivity of einfühlung and "eidetic vision". Critics of phenomenology feel that this inherent contradiction means that the method is arbitrary; its findings cannot be subjected to either verification or falsification.
Most phenomenologists state that they pay due regard to history. However, their critics feel that the method is intrinsically ahistorical in that it looks for universal structures that are independent of history. Phenomenology is also intrinsically against sociological or psychological explanations for religious phenomena.
D. Theological and Normative Theories
Although not strictly part of the academic study of religion, we will give a brief listing of the main types of such theories here, if only because these approaches are influential within religions themselves.
1. Justificatory or polemical
We can trace the origins of the study of religions back to theological or design normative exercises to prove the superiority of one religion over others. In particular, Christian scholars and missionaries described other religions in book after book, comparing them unfavourably with Christianity. Other religions have been slow to follow in modern times but there exist books by Hindus describing other religions as defective or only partial expressions of the truths contained in Hinduism; similarly, Buddhist books exist which describe the truths in other religions as "lower" forms of the truth of Buddhism.p36
2. Evolutionary
Following the intellectual success of Darwin's theory of evolution, it became natural to look upon religious history as an evolutionary process. In this perspective, the primal tribal religions of the world were seen as surviving specimens, "living fossils" or "survivals", of the early stages of religious development. Out of this early phase, the "higher" religions evolved. A similar status was accorded the folklore and mythology of Europe. Such writers as Edward B. Tylor (1832‑1917) took evolutionary ideas for granted as the basis for their views on humanity's religious development. Several Christian writers also found it useful to use an evolutionary schema as a polemic instrument to prove that Christianity was the most highly evolved religion; although in the case of Christian theologians, such ideas predated Darwin since they are also to be found in the writings of Hegel and Schleiermacher.
In the academic study of religion, however, evolutionist ideas died out in the years following the First World War. They gradually became discredited as it was realised that they were in fact based on presumptions of the cultural and religious superiority of the Christian West and were therefore normative in nature. Evolutionary theories were also discredited by works such as those by Andrew Lang and Wilhelm Schmidt . These pointed out that the evidence may p37 equally suggest that the earliest notion among primitive peoples was that of a single High God and that this later "degenerated" into polytheism, thus destroying the idea that primal religions were necessarily "survivals".
There is, however, one evolutionary theory that sets out to be non‑normative in nature. This theory is put forward by Robert Bellah (Beyond Belief, pp. 20‑45). He states that his theory is one of religion becoming more complex as it evolves. He is quite categorical in asserting, however, that "Neither religious man nor the structure of man's ultimate religious situation evolves, then, but rather religion as symbol system" ( p. 21). He considers that primitive humanity is as fully religious as humanity at any stage of human existence on this planet. What has evolved and differentiated is religious symbolization and its relationship to human existence and society. The capacity for symbolization gives human beings the ability to transcend and dominate their environment. Religious symbolization, at each stage of human development, images both humanity's view of the ultimate conditions of its existence and its view of itself. As humanity has evolved an increasingly complex social structure, religious symbolization has also developed in interaction with this. Bellah describes five stages of evolution:
a. Primitive Religion. This religious form has only one clear example which is Australian Aboriginal religion, although elements of it occur among other hunter‑gatherer societies. In Australian Aboriginal religion, it involves a mythical world which is called "the Dreaming". This is inhabited by human and animal ancestral figures who have great powers but are not gods ‑‑ they do not control the world nor are they worshipped. This mythical world is closely related to this world such that every person and thing in this world has its counterpart in that world. The two worlds inter‑penetrate in an intimate way such that they may be considered as one. Religious action is not concerned with worship. It is concerned with maintaining the social and cosmic harmony of that cosmos and obtaining specific benefits ‑‑ rain, harvest, children, health. The whole religious world is a given, it is fixed with almost no element of choice or will. There is, moreover, no sense of salvation in this religious system. Any notion of a life continuing after death is vague and unstructured. There is also no religious organisation at this level. Religious roles are fused with other roles and ceremonies are handed down within clans. The social implications of primitive religion are very limited. There is limited possibility for any change emerging from the religious world.
b. Archaic religion. In Bellah's scheme, this refers to the religious systems of Africa and the Pacific as well as the ancient religions of Egypt, the Middle East, India and China. This type of religion emerged once human beings began to develop agriculture and began to trade. The mythical beings in the religious symbol system have evolved here to become more objectified. They are now definitely recognisable as gods who control aspects of the world and who must be worshipped and appeased. There is still essentially one cosmos, with different gods dominating different parts of it. Religious action here takes the form of religious veneration and worship, typified by sacrifice. Religious organization is, at this level, still merged with other social functions and relatively non‑differentiated. Socially there may be a division into an upper religiously‑superior class, which may have priestly functions, and a lower inferior class. Political power is usually merged with religious power. The social implications of this level are much the same as for primitive religion. The traditional social structure is considered to be grounded in the divine order of the cosmos, and so there is little or no impetus to change.
c. Historic religion. The next stage in Bellah's scheme is the emergence of historic religions from about the year 800 B.C. onwards ‑‑ what has been called the axial age. This stage evolved once people began to live in cities and great empires emerged. It includes Buddhism, Taoism, Vedantic Hinduism, and later Christianity and Islam. At level of religious symbolization, the most important factor is the emergence of a religious cosmos that is superior in value to and different from this world. This leads to a decline in the value given to this empirical world and the emergence of world‑rejecting doctrines of salvation. Religious action is now directed towards the achievement of salvation. This in turn creates a definite sense of the self of the individual, a self that is deeper than the empirical self, the self that is capable of understanding and participating in the deeper structure of the universe revealed by the religious symbol of a transcendent world. Religious organisation in the historic religions reflects both the social complexity of the societies that had emerged at this time and the complexity of the religious symbolization. Society now has a four class structure with one class holding political and military power, a religious elite, an urban lower status group (merchants and skilled artisans), and the peasantry.
d. Early modern religion. Bellah identifies this stage of the evolution of religion with the emergence of Protestant Christianity. The religious symbolization removed much of the mythological baggage associated with the previous stages and concentrated on a direct relationship with the deity. The main difference with the historic religions was the fact that salvation was now available in this world and in a direct form that was not mediated through the religious classes. Special devotional and ritual practices no longer had a place. Religious action now involved the whole of one's daily life, a daily struggle to perfect oneself. The empirical world thus regained its importance as the theatre in which the human struggle takes place and God's plan is realised. The implications of all of this for religious organisation was to remove the need for a religious class. Human beings were still divided into those who were saved and those who were not, but the former were no longer a qualitative elite. The social implications of this development were spelled out by Weber in his theory about the rise of capitalism (see above).
e. Modern religion. The modern religious world, at least as far as the West is concerned, has seen the complete collapse of the traditional religious symbol system. Belief in a single coherent vision of a spiritual world has all but disappeared. Philosophers such as Kant have asserted the futility of basing human action on metaphysical foundations. An infinitely complex religious world has emerged with almost every individual creating his or her own system of spiritual symbolisation. There is a widespread acceptance among all religious persons of the need for a personal interpretation of religion, a personal search for meaning and standards. The inevitable result of this is a loss of authority of the religious organisations and the loss of the strong sense of voluntary submission to orthodoxy and religious groups that was a feature in early modern religion.
3. Relativist
With the emergence of relativist thought in many other spheres of intellectual life, there have emerged several relativist models of the relationship between religions. One of those who advocated such a view was Ernst Troeltsch. He came to the conclusion that all religions (and he eventually included Christianity among them) are relative manifestations of the universal Absolute . Another relativist was Arnold Toynbee. He considered that each religion was true for (i.e. suited to) a particular type of personality .
We have also noted, in Chapter Two, that the Baha'i position on metaphysics, and therefore on the question of the differing religions, is also based on relativism. The Baha'i concept is very similar to Hick's view with the exception that the Baha'i concept also contains the idea p39 that religion is evolving. This evolutionary idea is not, however, similar to those described above in that the evolutionary process is not considered to be at work at the level of metaphysics, theology, or in the fundamentals of ethics. So it does not make judgements about the relative worth of different religious traditions at these levels. The evolutionary concepts of the Baha'i Faith are at the social level. At this level, the Baha'i Faith considers that the social teachings of religions have evolved in accordance with humanity's social evolution. As humanity has evolved and become more complex socially, so successive religions have brought social laws and teachings that solve the problems created by this increasing complexity. In this analysis, each religion conveys an eternal spiritual truth, which is right for all time, and social teachings which are appropriate for the time in which the religion appeared.
One model that has been much advocated in recent years is what is generally called the perennial philosophy or philosophia perennis. This approach to religion, whose leading advocates in recent years have included Frithof Schuon and A.K. Coomaraswamy, considers that it is the extension of a traditional school that has existed associated with most religions from primordial times. It differentiates between the exoteric p38 or outward forms of a religion and the esoteric truths which these outward forms manifest. While the exoteric aspects of the religions of the world may be widely diverse and even contradictory, the esoteric points to a single Absolute. The cosmos consists of a series of hierarchical levels through which the One (the Absolute) becomes the many (phenomena) and also through which the individual can ascend to the truth. The path to the Absolute does not involve neglecting the exoteric. To reach this Absolute, one needs to immerse oneself fully in both the exoteric and esoteric aspects of one of the religious traditions.
Another contemporary model is that of John Hick. He draws upon the Kantian distinction between noumenon, the thing in itself, and phenomenon, the thing as it is experienced and known. God, or Absolute Reality, as noumenon, is beyond description and even beyond knowledge in any comprehensive sense. Therefore, as far as religious experience is concerned, we are dealing with phenomenon. However, phenomenon, our experience of the Absolute, is inescapably coloured by our different individual experiences and cultural contexts. This is the reason for the wide‑ranging differing descriptions in the world's religions .
Typology of Religion
A typology of religious groups tries to divide religious groups into different categories. Typological theories are not in themselves theories of religion but they necessarily presuppose a theoretical structure. They make assumptions about what aspects of religion are fundamental and are thus the basis on which categorisation occurs.
One of the best‑known typologies is delineated by Ernst Troeltsch (1865‑1923) in his book The Social Teaching of the Christian Church (1912, trans. 1931). He expanded a distinction, which had been implied in the work of Weber, between a "church" and a "sect".
Troeltsch saw the history of Christianity as a struggle between two conflicting tendencies: compromise with and acceptance of the world; and rejection of the world. The church, which manifests the former tendency, aims to include in its membership the whole of a society, which often corresponds to ethnic or geographical borders. Children are recognised as members by virtue of birth within that society. It considers that it is the sole means of grace and that salvation can only be attained through its dogmas and its hierarchy of priesthood. It is a conservative organisation and strongly supportive of the established social order and usually of the state.
A sect, on the other hand, emphasises voluntary membership of the group through conversion. Membership frequently involves convincing the group that the applicant has a specific qualification. This may be that the applicant has knowledge of the sect's doctrines, or has had a particular experience. Children therefore are frequently required to become members of their own accord when they reach a particular age. The emphasis in sects is p32 not on rituals and dogmas. There is usually no sense in which grace is the exclusive property of the sect to be mediated through the priestly hierarchy. Instead the emphasis is on ethics and morality. Sects are often exclusive both in attitude and social structure, rejecting the rest of the world. Because of these features, sects usually develop in one of two ways. They either become revolutionary seeking to change the existing order radically; or they withdraw into small communities where they can live according to their ideals and from where they can criticise the rest of the world.
H. Richard Niebuhr (1894‑1962), in his book The Social Sources of Denominationalism (1929), tried to make this picture drawn by Troeltsch more dynamic by examining the way in which a sect moves towards becoming a church. He suggested that the sect gradually modified its original rejectionist ideals so as to adapt to social realities. This idea was developed and the notion grew of an intermediate category of the "denomination" as a partially routinised and accommodated sect. However the distinction between church and denomination has never been clear and there is a marked tendency to use these two terms interchangeably. J. Milton Yinger, on the other hand, in his book Religion, Society and the Individual (1957), described those sects that refused to accommodate and indeed reinforced their opposition to the world. These he called the "established sects" (e.g. the Amish, Hutterites, and the Jehovah's Witnesses).
Yinger also suggested subdividing sects into three categories: world‑accepting, world‑transforming, and world‑rejectingp33 sects. This categorisation is not very different from that of Bryan Wilson ("An Analysis of Sect Development", 1959):
1. Conversionist. These are mainly concerned with evangelism, thereby hoping to change the world, e.g. most fundamentalist groups such as the Salvation Army and the Elim Foursquare Gospel.
2. Adventist or Revolutionist. These focus on prophesying the imminent overturn of the existing social order; they emphasise that we are living in the "times of the end", e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses.
3. Introversionist or Pietist. These turn away from the world and focus in on the community of believers; this is the only place where the high ideals of the group can be realised, e.g. Old Order Amish, Hutterites.
4. Gnostic (Manipulationist) Sects. These believe that they possess a special teaching through which worldly goals such as success or health can be achieved, e.g. Christian Science.
To these four, Wilson later added another three categories (see "A Typology of Sects"):
5. Thaumaturgical Sects. These are groups that insist that it is possible for human beings to experience the direct effects of the supernatural, e.g. spiritualist churches. They often use this contact with the supernatural to achieve worldly goals such as curing illness. They are thus similar in many ways to group 4 above, which Wilson has renamed in this classification manipulationist, except that they are less universalist and more personal.
6. Reformist Sects. Revolutionary sects (see above) often adapt to the world in the course of their development by becoming concerned with reforming the world through good deeds and social action. Examples of such a sect include the Society of Friends (Quakers).
7. Utopian Sects. These sects try to reconstruct their world on a communitarian basis. They withdraw from the world and set up communities in which they can practise their ideals. They are however different from the introversionist sects in that they do not see the creation of communities as a defence against the outside world. Rather they see the creation of their communities as a positive step, as the way that the world should be organised. Examples include the Oneida Community.
Troeltsch, as well as describing his division between church and sect, also described a third type of religious response which he called mysticism. This consisted of a purely personal religion with minimal social form. This group is now more commonly subsumed under p34 the name "cults". These are usually characterised as groups that have a positive attitude towards the secular world. They often offer their teachings as a way of achieving success, health or happiness in the world. These goals may be gained through a special knowledge or through particular techniques of interpersonal relationships. They have little social structure (although they may be focused on a charismatic leader) and poorly defined membership criteria. They are basically the same as Wilson fourth category above. Such groups are exemplified by Scientology and Christian Science. Roy Wallis has suggested that one key difference between sects and cults is the fact that the sect is epistemologically authoritarian (its members must subscribe to an authoritative set of beliefs); while cults are epistemologically individualist (the members can choose what they like of the teachings of the cult) . A different typology is that proposed by Robert Bellah as an evolutionary scheme (see pp. XXX ‑ above)
The major criticism of these typologies has been and continues to be that they were primarily evolved with Christian churches and sects in mind. Therefore they are of limited usefulness when applied to other religions which organise themselves differently and have other priorities. The definitions of sect, denomination and religion given in Chapter Eight are an attempt to break out of this limited perspective.
p35
Approaches to the Study of Religion
There have been many issues in the methodology of the study of religion. It is not possible to consider all of these in a book such as this. We will however consider one major issue that has been the subject, directly or indirectly, of much debate.
We can broadly divide the theories of religion discussed in first part of this chapter into two main groups. This division is somewhat confused by the fact that these two groups have been given several different names. On the one hand, there are the reductive, empiricist, analytical, determinist or positivist approaches and, on the other, the synthetic, integrative, relativistic, or holistic approaches.p4
1. The Reductive/Empiricist Paradigm (also called analytical/ determinist/positivist/etic)
The guiding principle of this approach to the study of religion is to try to analyse the phenomenon of religion. Analysis involves trying to break a phenomenon down into its component parts. With regard to religious phenomena, the goal is to analyse these in terms of factors derived from such disciplines as sociology, economics, psychology, and anthropology. This approach regards religious phenomena as being nothing but particular instances of the workings of these other disciplines. These two words "nothing but" are the key words. This approach considers that an analysis of religious phenomena down to sociological (or psychological or anthropological) mechanisms of lower levels of complexity gives a complete explanation with no loss of comprehensiveness. In other words that religion is nothing but the working out of these lower level mechanisms. It can be completely understood thus with no residue of data that needs any further higher level explanation (i.e. any new laws that emerge only at the level of religious phenomena).
The background of this approach comes from the classical scientific method which seeks to analyse complex phenomena by looking for explanations at a lower, more basic level. The conceptual model is that of phenomena being like a giant mechanism. So the best way of finding out how the mechanism works is to take it to pieces and find how each part functions. Ideally then, all human phenomena would be explained by analysis or reduction to biological phenomena (e.g. war p5 can be explained by animal territoriality and Darwinian survival of the fittest, etc.); all biological phenomena would be analysed down to chemical phenomena (e.g. genetics can be explained by the molecular biology of DNA; animal behaviour by the action of hormones and chemical transmitters, etc.); then all chemical phenomena would be analysed down to physics (e.g. chemical reactions can be explained in terms of the stability of electron orbits around atoms). By a parallel process the complex phenomenon of religion can be analysed down to the more fundamental level of sociology or psychology.
Of course, reductionist scholars will sometimes use higher level descriptions. This is, however, in principle, only either as a shorthand for designating a complex of lower level phenomena or because we do not have yet sufficient data to enable a full analysis of the phenomenon down to the lower level.
We can view the same approach from the opposite direction as maintaining that the lower level phenomena determine the higher level, hence the name determinism. The implication of determinism, if carried to its logical conclusion, is that, since everything at the higher level is determined by what occurs at the lower, all human action is determined. Indeed, if we had sufficient data, it could be predicted. Because the cosmic machine is in motion, everything in the future is already determined and has been from the beginning of time. Everything that happens in the future is a working out of processes that have already been set in motion. One of the philosophical consequences of a strict application of this approach is to assert that human free will is an illusion.p6
Closely linked to the analytical approach to phenomena is the other aspect of the "scientific approach", empiricism or logical positivism. This is based on the idea that the correct manner in which to proceed is to obtain and assess the facts first; and then to evolve by induction from these a hypothesis that can be put to the test.
2. The Synthetic/Relativistic Paradigm (also called holistic or emic)
The alternative viewpoint considers that complex phenomena cannot necessarily be analysed down to simpler phenomena, at least not completely. Complex phenomena have properties that arise at that level of complexity and cannot be predicted from lower levels of complexity. In other words the very fact that several phenomena from a lower level of complexity have combined to produce a more complex phenomenon leads to the emergence of new properties that are not properties of nor even predictable from the lower level features. A simple example is the fact that the combination of Hydrogen and Oxygen yields a substance, Water, the properties of which are not in any way derived from or predictable from the properties of Hydrogen and Oxygen individually. Thus, no matter how far we may progress in understanding the behaviour of atoms and sub‑atomic particles, this will not lead to any greater understanding in the field of, for example, animal behaviour, let alone human behaviour. These higher levels of complexity require their own levels of explanation. While analysis to lower levels of causative explanation p7 may often be useful and even illuminating, these lower levels never in practice fully explain all the features of the higher level of complexity.
A key aspect of this line of thinking is the idea that the higher level phenomena act so as to constrain the lower level phenomena towards certain pathways of action. In other words the direction of causation is downwards from the higher level to the lower. This does not mean that the higher level phenomena cause the lower level phenomena to break the laws that operate at that lower level. The activities of a cat, for example, can never cause the atoms of which it is composed to break the laws of physics. It only means that where the lower level phenomena have different possibilities of action, the higher level (i.e. the system as a whole) constrains this choice in one particular direction. This is sometimes called the holistic view as it envisages the system‑as‑a‑whole as being the key operant. This viewpoint is in direct contrast to the determinist viewpoint which sees the direction of causation as being from the lower levels to the higher ones; i.e. that what happens at the lower levels determines what happens at the higher ones.
For scholars who adopt this approach, the key to the study of religion lies in understanding the phenomenon of religion in itself (i.e. at its own level and not by reduction to lower levels). The goal must be to understand the religion or the religious phenomenon in its own p8 terms (i.e. at its own level of complexity); to understand how human beings come to believe as they do and why they act as they do.
Closely linked to this is relativism. This viewpoint opposes the empiricist vision that conceptualises religious data as "given", facts that are seen and agreed upon by all. Relativism stresses that the data can only be seen relative to a particular observer and that observer has his or her own viewpoint. So there are no independent or absolute data, only people holding particular views and seeing the world in a particular way.
The Debate
The debate between these two approaches has been intense and multi‑faceted. On the one hand, those favouring the analytical approach claim for themselves the title "scientific". They maintain that the empirical approach that they advocate is the scientific approach to religion. It is therefore the only truly academic study of religion. Their position was forcefully put forward, for example, by R.J. Zwi Werblowsky at the 1960 Marburg Conference of the International Association for the History of Religions and in papers that he published at about this time . Werblowsky was particularly concerned to separate the academic study of religion from theology and all normative positions. The true academic scholar should eliminate p9 his or her personal religious beliefs from all aspects of his or her scholarly work. The academic study of religion should adhere to the standards of scientific and historical research. It should be rigorously defended from the attentions of "dilettantes, theologians and idealists."
The contrary viewpoint can be exemplified by the writings of Cantwell Smith who considers that there is no such thing as a neutral academic statement that can be examined in isolation from the scholar who makes it. Every statement is a personal statement; it is made from a particular point of view (and thus potentially reveals as much about the author as about the subject of the statement) . Also there are Cantwell Smith's objections to the concept of "religion" which he claims is only a reification imposed upon the data (by empiricists). He prefers to think in terms of the religious faith of individuals (i.e. the religious experience relative to the individual) and the ongoing religious tradition .p9a
Those that support the holistic view point out that the analytical/empiricist view of the scientific method is itself outdated. It belongs to the classical Newtonian paradigm which is no longer fully accepted by the scientific community. The Newtonian paradigm is only strictly applicable to regular bodies of intermediate size in closed systems acting in a smooth, regular manner. The way that the Newtonian methods are applied to most real situations (which in practice rarely meet these criteria) is to p10 approximate these to regular systems. This works in optics or engineering, but the more complex a system becomes, the less accurate these approximations become. By the time we are dealing with biological and human phenomena, Newtonian methods have become almost useless .
New scientific approaches to complexity and irregularity are being pioneered but these are as yet only in the early stages of development. The important point is that the reductionist, analytical model is no longer seen as appropriate in these studies .
Similarly, the empiricist view can be criticised as it assumes that there are pure facts that can be obtained. Relativity theory, however, leads to the conclusion that there is no such thing as pure facts. All data are dependent on (relative to) the methods used to obtain them. In the field of religious studies this would mean that the data that we collect and study are determined by our theoretical framework. In other words, the data that we collect, far from being the seed from which to derive our theories, as the empiricist tradition would dictate, are themselves theory‑dependant. p11
The empiricists would argue against the holistic view by saying that it leads to meaninglessness. Once one allows for the introduction of high level phenomena and for high level laws to be operating, one can no longer examine phenomena in any systematic "scientific" way. This is because the whole of scientific thought is based upon the idea that a hypothesis is an explanation of a phenomenon that occurs; i.e. it explains at a lower, more simple level the occurrence of a phenomenon. Such a hypothesis should lead to a prediction of further phenomena. Therefore it should be possible to verify the hypothesis by seeing whether the prediction is accurate or not. All of this depends however on the principle of determinism ‑‑ that the lower level phenomena determine the observations one makes of the higher level phenomena. Once one allows that, at the higher level, new laws may begin to operate then the principle of determinism can no longer apply. Any discrepancies from the predictions of the hypothesis could be due to the operation of new laws. The scientific principle of verifiability breaks down. Since, according to logical empiricism, verifiability is the main criterion for cognitive meaning (i.e. only statements that are verifiable, or at least potentially falsifiable, are meaningful), the holistic approach results in cognitive meaninglessness.
The debate will no doubt continue, resurfacing in various guises, for many years to come. In practice, both approaches yield useful and illuminating results. The present writer's inclination is to view both approaches as complementary. In other words that religion is a complex phenomenon, for which new laws emerge at its own level of complexity. p12 These new laws constrain events at the lower level and therefore the phenomenon of religion cannot be fully explained by lower level hypotheses from other fields such as sociology, psychology, economics, etc. These higher level laws, however, only constrain the lower level laws, they do not break them. Therefore, an understanding of the lower level laws is also of value. The analogy would be that biology is a complex field and has its own laws that constrain the occurrence of lower level phenomena such as biochemical reactions. For example, of the hundreds of ways that a long protein molecule could fold, it is constrained to fold in the only way that would make it have the desired biological activity. However, the laws of biology do not contravene chemical laws. It is, therefore, legitimate and useful for our overall understanding of biological processes to investigate the manner in which the lower level laws of chemistry affect the biological world. Some scholars have preferred to use two terms, emic ("inside" meaning of a religious tradition using the understandings and categories that the adherents themselves recognize) and etic ("outside" interpretative categories that a scholar might impose upon a religion).
The Goal of the Study of Religion
Finally, it is necessary to say a brief word about an issue that is in some ways a reflection of the above debate. A tension exists within religious studies between two points of view. The first considers the study of religion to be just an academic exercise comparable to geology or chemistry (knowledge for knowledge's sake, the academic goal). The second looks to some further benefit from this study. This benefit may be in terms either of drawing the peoples of different religions together in dialogue (the dialogical goal) or of achieving greater understanding of humanity's position in the universe and thus helping to solve humanity's current problems (the soteriological goal).
On the surface, there is no dispute. Those engaged in research in academic departments of religious studies would usually assert that they are pursuing the first, the academic goal. But in analysing the writings of some of the most respected and influential figures in the field, one frequently finds statements that indicate a dialogical or soteriological goal underlying the work. Only a few examples of this tendency can be cited here: Mircea Eliade who saw his theories of the sacralisation of time and space as a way for human beings to p3 escape the terror and alienation of the modern world ; Cantwell Smith who sees his work on religion as contributing to "our understanding of man" and so helping us to "think clearly and to live faithfully, in the new world in which we find ourselves" ; and Peter Berger who wrote his book, The Heretical Imperative, in order to show a way out of "the impasse of contemporary Christian thought" .
Religion is a very challenging area of study. It makes claims relating to all aspects of life. One can speculate that it is really not possible to study such a phenomenon completely dispassionately. Either consciously or subconsciously all scholars must bring their own preconceptions and biases to this study. One can perhaps make the same statement about scholars in religious studies as E.H. Carr makes in his Trevelyan lectures regarding historians: "Study the historian before you study [his] facts . . . When you read a work of history, always listen out for the buzzing [of bees in the bonnet]. If you detect none, either you are tone deaf or your historian is a dull dog."
BIBLIOGRAPHY
For a historical overview of the development of the study of religion, see Sharpe, Comparative Religion. For a detailed description and assessment of different approaches to the study of religion, see Waardenburg, Classical Approaches to the Study of Religion and Whaling, Contemporary Approaches to the Study of Religion and The World's Religious Traditions. Another useful book is Morris, Anthropological Studies of Religion.
1. "The Structure of the Psyche" in The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche. Collected Works, vol. 8, para 342, p. 158.
2. Man and his symbols, p. 76; quoted in Morris, Anthropological Studies, p. 170.
3. There is of course an extensive history of polemical literature among the three Western religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, directed at each other, as well as between Hinduism and Buddhism. But these do not purport to be academic descriptions of the other religion. The use of purportedly academic studies as a tool for polemics is a modern phenomenon.
4. The Making of Religion, pp. 173‑293.
5. The Origin and Growth of Religion, pp. 172‑218, 251‑290.
6. "The Place of Christianity among the World Religions".
7. Study of History, vol. 7, pp. 723ff.
8. See the exposition of the philosophia perennis by Seyyed Hossein Nasr in Whaling, The World's Religious Traditions, pp. 181‑200.
9. Hick, God has many Names and Problems of Religious Pluralism. See also Runzo, Reason, Relativism and God.
10. Wallis, "Ideology, Authority and the Development of Cultic Movements".
11. See Sharpe, Comparative Religion, p 277‑8; Dudley, Religion on Trial, pp. 16‑31; Werblowsky, "Marburg ‑ and after?"
12. See, in particular Smith, "A Human View of Truth" and "Comparative Religion: whither ‑ and why?".
13. See Smith, Faith and Belief and Meaning and End of Religion, pp. 139‑173.
14. The Newtonian system breaks down in other directions also. When we move away from bodies of intermediate size in either direction ‑ towards sub‑atomic particles or galactic phenomena ‑ the Newtonian laws gradually cease to apply and relativity and quantum laws begin to become the only way of explaining observations.
15. On complexity and the inadequacies of the analytical model in the physical sciences, see Paul Davies, The Cosmic Blueprint, especially pp. 21‑34.
16. Eliade, Patterns in Comparative Religion. A good summary of Eliade's thought on this subject can be found in Dudley, Religion on Trial, pp. 65‑100.
17. Faith and Belief, p. viii.
18. Heretical Imperative, p. xii.
19. What is History?, p. 23.
Bahá’í Scholarship
History
|
v The Bab – Letters of the Living, Hujjat, Vahid v Bahá’u’lláh – Nabil Akbar, Gulpaygani v `Abdu’l-Bahá – Fadil Mazandarani v Shoghi Effendi – Ishraq-Khavari, Townshend |
|
Mirza Abu’l-Fadl Gulpaygani Developed an approach for teaching Jews in Developed an approach for teaching Sunnis in Developed an approach for teachings Christians in |
|
Role of Bahá’í Scholars 1. Defence of the Faith - Attacks 2. Promotion of the Faith Correlation of teachings with social reality - “Expert” presentations of the Faith - 3. Development of the Faith 4 Preservation of the Faith |
|
It seems what we need now is a more profound and co‑ordinated Baha'i scholarship in order to attract such men as you are contacting. The world has ‑ at least the thinking world ‑ caught up by now with all the great and universal principles enunciated by Baha'u'llah over 70 years ago, and so of course it does not sound "new" to them. But we know that the deeper teachings, the capacity of His projected World Order to re‑create society, are new and dynamic. It is these we must learn to present intelligently and enticingly to such men! (3 July 1949) Shoghi Effendi in The Importance of Deepening, in Compilation of Compilations, no. 510, p. 230 If the Baha'is want to be really effective in teaching the Cause they need to be much better informed and able to discuss intelligently, intellectually, the present condition of the world and its problems. We need Baha'i scholars, not only people far, far more deeply aware of what our teachings really are, but also well‑read and well‑educated people, capable of correlating our teachings to the current thoughts of the leaders of society. We Baha'is should, in other words, arm our minds with knowledge in order to better demonstrate to, especially, the educated classes, the truths enshrined in our Faith... (5 July 1949) Shoghi Effendi in The Importance of Deepening, in Compilation of Compilations, no. 511, p. 230 |
|
Dangers of scholarship • Feelings of superiority - tradition of religious leadership • Impatience and intolerance • Distancing - danger - materialist cause and effect - account for the Faith • Loss of Faith • Discrepancy - dealing with it oneself - announcing it to the Bahá’í community |
|
Should any one among you be incapable of grasping a certain truth, or be striving to comprehend it, show forth, when conversing with him, a spirit of extreme kindliness and good‑will. Help him to see and recognize the truth, without esteeming yourself to be, in the least, superior to him, or to be possessed of greater endowments. (Baha'u'llah, Gleanings, no, 5, pp. 8‑9) |
|
Dangers of scholarship • • Danger of making Faith conform to current theories • Clashes with other Bahá’í • Clashes with Bahá’í administration - over review |
|
Danger of "attempting to make the Bahá’í Faith relevant to modern society is to incur the grave risk of compromising the fundamental verities of our Faith in an efforts to make it conform to current theories and practices . (Universal House of Justice, letter 21 July 1968) |
|
Qualities for engaging in Scholarship • Purity of motive • Humility • Loyalty to the Covenant • commitment to deepening • commitment to participation in Bahá’í community life • Wisdom and patience - in presentation of findings - shock |
|
Thou hast written that one of the friends hath composed a treatise. This was mentioned in the Holy Presence, and this is what was revealed in response: Great care should be exercised that whatever is written in these days doth not cause dissension, and invite the objection of the people. Whatever the friends of the one true God say in these days is listened to by the people of the world. It hath been revealed in the Lawh‑i‑Hikmat: "The unbelievers have inclined their ears towards us in order to hear that which might enable them to cavil against God, the Help in Peril, the Self‑Subsisting." Whatever is written should not transgress the bounds of tact and wisdom, and in the words used there should lie hid the property of milk, so that the children of the world may be nurtured therewith, and attain maturity. We have said in the past that one word hath the influence of spring and causeth hearts to become fresh and verdant, while another is like unto blight which causeth the blossoms and flowers to wither. God grant that authors among the friends will write in such a way as would be acceptable to fair‑minded souls, and not lead to cavilling by the people. Baha'u'llah, Writers and Writing in Compilation of Compilations, no. 2212, p. 407 |
|
Consultation / مشورت آسمان حكمت الهی بدو نير روشن و منير است مشورت و شفقت در جميع امور بمشورت متمسك شويد چه كه اوست سراج هدايت راه نمايد و آگاهی عطا كند ( مائده آسماني - جلد ۴- حضرت بهإالله - ص ۳۴۹ ) |
Moojan Momen
For those of us who live in the more developed world, science has led to a great increase in our physical comfort and convenience; it has given us the freedom and time to develop ourselves. Yet people in the modern world are just as if not more unhappy and unfulfilled than their predecessors at any time in past. Many feel themselves to be wandering through their lives aimlessly not knowing what to do with the freedom that science and technology has given them. Many have thought that the answer is to fill this vacuum by pursuing what they think will give them happiness, whether this be power, wealth, or sex, while an increasing number seek to escape the emptiness and despair of their lives by turning to alcohol and drugs. Yet all of these answers turn out to be no answer at all. They lead to dissatisfaction, greater despair and alienation. This fragmentation and aimlessness in our lives is reflected in our societies in a breakdown in inter-personal relationships: marital break-down, loneliness, violent inhuman crimes, a rising suicide rate and so on.
Just over a hundred years ago, Baha'u'llah, who in the Baha'i scriptures likens Himself to a doctor healing the spiritual disease with which our present-day world is afflicted, states that He has examined the condition of the world, made His diagnosis and prescribed the remedy:
The All-Knowing Physician hath His finger on the pulse of mankind. He perceiveth the disease, and prescribeth, in His unerring wisdom, the remedy. Every age hath its own problem, and every soul its particular aspiration. The remedy the world needeth in its present-day afflictions can never be the same as that which a subsequent age may require. Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in, and centre your deliberations on its exigencies and requirements.(1)
As part of the diagnosis, the Baha'i scriptures survey the human world and perceive that we have lost sight of our true nature, we do not realise who we truly are and, as a result, we have become enslaved to our passions and desires, have lost our orientation, and are wandering aimlessly, trusting to the prescriptions and instructions of unskilled doctors while ignoring the remedies of the True Physician. And so, in the Baha'i scriptures, Baha'u'llah issues His call, summoning us to a realisation of our true selves, urging us to free ourselves from the illusions of the world and to turn ourselves towards the Divine, the transcendent reality that is the true orientation of our lives. Only in this way would we find what will give us peace, contentment and lasting happiness.
O Son of Spirit!
I created thee rich, why dost thou bring thyself down to poverty?
Noble I made thee, wherewith dost thou abase thyself?
Out of the essence of knowledge I gave thee being, why seekest thou enlightenment from anyone beside Me?
Out of the clay of love I moulded thee, how dost thou busy thyself with another? (2)
Baha'u'llah states that we as human beings are enmeshed in the snare of materialism. We are so engrossed in the drive to acquire the things of this world that we do not realise that although we think that we possess things, in reality we are often possessed by them. The larger and more expensive a possession is, the greater the tyranny it exercises over our lives. The more we have, the greater our greed becomes and so that greed will never be satisfied.
O Son of Man!
Thou dost wish for gold and I desire thy freedom from it.
Thou thinkest thyself rich in its possession, and I recognize thy wealth in thy sanctity therefrom.
By My life! This is My knowledge, and that is thy fancy; how can My way accord with thine?(3)
And even those who are not trapped by material things are often dominated by what the Baha'i scriptures call the `idle fancies and vain imaginings' of our minds.
O Son of Man!
Many a day hath passed over thee whilst thou hast busied thyself with thy fancies and idle imaginings.
How long art thou to slumber on thy bed?
Lift up thy head from slumber, for the Sun hath risen to the zenith, haply it may shine upon thee with the light of beauty.(4)
Looking at the condition of the human world then, Baha'u'llah condemns the materialism and self-delusion on which it is based:
Alas! Alas! O Lovers of Worldly Desire!
Even as the swiftness of lightning ye have passed by the Beloved One, and have set your hearts on satanic fancies.
Ye bow the knee before your vain imagining, and call it truth.
Ye turn your eyes towards the thorn, and name it a flower.
Not a pure breath have ye breathed, nor hath the breeze of detachment been wafted from the meadows of your hearts.
Ye have cast to the winds the loving counsels of the Beloved and have effaced them utterly from the tablet of your hearts, and even as the beasts of the field, ye move and have your being within the pastures of desire and passion.(5)
Baha'u'llah reminds us that the days of our lives are swiftly passing while we remain enmeshed in this lamentable condition:
O Ye That Are Lying As Dead on The Couch of Heedlessness!
Ages have passed and your precious lives are well-nigh ended, yet not a single breath of purity hath reached Our court of holiness from you . . .
Him whom I abhor ye have loved, and of My foe ye have made a friend.
Notwithstanding, ye walk on My earth complacent and self-satisfied, heedless that My earth is weary of you and everything within it shunneth you.
Were ye but to open your eyes, ye would, in truth, prefer a myriad griefs unto this joy, and would count death itself better than this life.(6)
O My Children! I fear lest, bereft of the melody of the dove of heaven,
ye will sink back to the shades of utter loss, and,
never having gazed upon the beauty of the rose,
return to water and clay.(7)
Baha'u'llah urges us during our brief, ephemeral lives upon this earth to seize our chance:
O My Servant!
Free thyself from the fetters of this world,
and loose thy soul from the prison of self.
Seize thy chance, for it will come to thee no more.(8)
Everything in this world will return to dust and so if we want something that will last, that will be of enduring value, Baha'u'llah says that we must turn to the spiritual world, to eternal values and goals:
O Friends!
Abandon not the everlasting beauty for a beauty that must die,
and set not your affections on this mortal world of dust.(9)
And so God states that the answer, the prescription for the illness that afflicts the world of humanity, that which will give human beings the inner peace that they want, is to turn towards the Divine, to turn towards the spiritual and away from the material.
O Son of Utterance!
Turn thy face unto Mine and renounce all save Me;
for My sovereignty endureth and My dominion perisheth not.
If thou seekest another than Me, yea, if thou searchest the universe for evermore,
thy quest will be in vain.(10)
Baha'u'llah has revealed a great deal about the path of spiritual development that the individual must take. In a brief introductory survey such as this, it is only possible to focus on a few points.
Taking the first step
In travelling the path of spirituality, it is clear from the Baha'i scriptures and indeed from the scriptures of other religions that it is up to human beings to take the first step on the path. Thus in the Bible, Jesus says: `Knock and it shall be opened up to you' (Luke 11:9). We must make the first movement and knock. In the Qur'an, we find the words: `Whoso maketh efforts for us, in our ways shall we assuredly guide them' (29:69). We have to make the initial effort and then God will guide us. Similarly the Baha'i scriptures say that we must take the first step:
O Son of Love!
Thou art but one step away from the glorious heights above and from the celestial tree of love. Take thou one pace and with the next advance into the immortal realm and enter the pavilion of eternity.(11)
In the Baha'i scriptures we find the analogy of the human heart as a mirror - it reflects whatever it is turned towards. If it is turned towards heaven it reflects heavenly things and if it is turned towards earth, it reflects earthly concerns and so we must make the effort to turn our hearts towards the Divine and away from the perishable and evanescent attractions of the world. It is we ourselves who must make that initial effort to move the mirror of our hearts. If we are not turned towards God, His light cannot shine in our mirror, His love cannot be reflected in our soul.
O Son of Being!
Love Me, that I may love thee.
If thou lovest Me not, My love can in no wise reach thee.
Know this, O servant.(12)
Detachment
After we have taken the first step and made the initial effort, we need to try to detach ourselves from this world. We must try to cleanse our heart from their attachment to the things of this world, which Baha'u'llah likens to dust or mire and clay which he urges us to clean from off the mirror of our hearts. He tells us to:
. . . cleanse thine heart from the world and all its vanities, and suffer not the love of any stranger to enter and dwell therein. Not until thou dost purify thine heart from every trace of such love can the brightness of the light of God shed its radiance upon it, for to none hath God given more than one heart . . . And as the human heart . . . is one and undivided, it behoveth thee to take heed that its affections be, also, one and undivided. Cleave thou, therefore, with the whole affection of thine heart, unto His love, and withdraw it from the love of any one besides Him . . . My sole purpose in revealing to thee these words is to sanctify thee from the transitory things of the earth, and aid thee to enter the realm of everlasting glory.(13)
Baha'u'llah asserts that there is only room in our hearts for one love and so we must choose -- will we choose God or the world?
O My Friend in Word! Ponder awhile.
Hast thou ever heard that friend and foe should abide in one heart?
Cast out then the stranger, that the Friend may enter His home.(14)
Baha'u'llah reveals that if we truly seek for spiritual development we must first be prepared to detach ourselves from the things of this world. In outlining the requirements of the spiritual quest, Baha'u'llah says:
O My brother! When a true seeker determineth to take the step of search in the path leading unto the knowledge of the Ancient of Days, he must, before all else, cleanse his heart, which is the seat of the revelation of the inner mysteries of God, from the obscuring dust of all acquired knowledge, and the allusions of the embodiments of satanic fancy. He must purge his breast, which is the sanctuary of the abiding love of the Beloved, of every defilement, and sanctify his soul from all that pertaineth to water and clay, from all shadowy and ephemeral attachments. He must so cleanse his heart that no remnant of either love or hate may linger therein, lest that love blindly incline him to error, or that hate repel him away from the truth . . . That seeker must, at all times, put his trust in God, must renounce the peoples of the earth, must detach himself from the world of dust, and cleave unto Him Who is the Lord of Lords.(15)
And so, the Baha'i scriptures enumerate one by one the requirements of the true seeker upon the spiritual path. Their description of spirituality involves the acquisition of virtues.
Virtues
If we continue the passage from the Baha'i scriptures that is quoted above, it goes on to describe the virtues that must be acquired upon the path to spirituality:
He must never seek to exalt himself above any one,
must wash away from the tablet of his heart every trace of pride and vain-glory,
must cling unto patience and resignation, observe silence and refrain from idle talk . . .
That seeker should, also, regard backbiting as grievous error, and keep himself aloof from its dominion, inasmuch as backbiting quencheth the light of the heart, and extinguisheth the life of the soul.
He should be content with little, and be freed from all inordinate desire.
He should treasure the companionship of them that have renounced the world,
and regard avoidance of boastful and worldly people a precious benefit.
At the dawn of every day he should commune with God,
and, with all his soul, persevere in the quest of his Beloved.
He should consume every wayward thought with the flame of His loving mention, and,
with the swiftness of lightning, pass by all else save Him.
He should succour the dispossessed,
and never withhold his favour from the destitute.
He should show kindness to animals,
how much more unto his fellow-man, to him who is endowed with the power of utterance.
He should not hesitate to offer up his life for his Beloved,
nor allow the censure of the people to turn him away from the Truth.(16)
The Baha'i scriptures teach that we must seek to acquire such virtues as love, justice, patience, trustworthiness, truthfulness, etc. There is not room to list and describe all of these, but some are described elsewhere (pp. XX-X - ch 2).
Troubles and Difficulties
Baha'u'llah reveals to those that are seeking to follow the path of spirituality that it is inevitable that they will meet with troubles and trials and difficulties. The very act of breaking the ties of materialism, greed and desire that bind us to this world is a painful one. Baha'u'llah states that pain is our constant companion, our ever-present steed, as we travel along the valley in our spiritual quest:
The steed of this Valley is pain; and if there be no pain this journey will never end. In this station the lover hath no thought save the Beloved, and seeketh no refuge save the Friend . . .
Wherefore must the veils of the satanic self be burned away at the fire of love, that the spirit may be purified and cleansed and thus may know the station of the Lord of the Worlds.(17)
If there be no pain, there will be no progress. `Abdu'l-Baha, the son of Baha'u'llah, has described the way that pain and suffering functions in our lives. He was asked the question: `Does the soul progress more through sorrow or through the joy in this world?' He replied:
The mind and spirit of man advance when he is tried by suffering. The more the ground is ploughed the better the seed will grow, the better the harvest will be. Just as the plough furrows the earth deeply, purifying it of weeds and thistles, so suffering and tribulation free man from the petty affairs of this worldly life until he arrives at a state of complete detachment. His attitude in this world will be that of divine happiness. Man is, so to speak, unripe: the heat of the fire of suffering will mature him. Look back to the times past and you will find that the greatest men have suffered most.(18)
Thus suffering is necessary for our spiritual advancement and therefore if we understood its true nature, we would welcome it.
O Son of Man! My calamity is My providence, outwardly it is fire and vengeance, but inwardly it is light and mercy. Hasten thereunto that thou mayest become an eternal light and an immortal spirit. This is My command unto thee, do thou observe it.(19)
|
Prayer for Hardship and Difficulties |
|
O my Lord! Thou knowest that the people are encircled with pain and calamities and are environed with hardships and trouble. Every trial doth attack man and every dire adversity doth assail him like unto the assault of a serpent. There is no shelter and asylum for him except under the wing of Thy protection, preservation, guard and custody. O Thou the Merciful One! O my Lord! Make Thy protection my armour, Thy preservation my shield, humbleness before the door of Thy oneness my guard, and Thy custody and defence my fortress and my abode. Preserve me from the suggestions of self and desire, and guard me from every sickness, trial, difficulty and ordeal. Verily, Thou art the Protector, the Guardian, the Preserver, the Sufficer, and verily, Thou art the Merciful of the Most Merciful. (`Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i Prayers, pp. 136-13) |
The Purpose of the Physical World
All that has been written thus far in this chapter is similar to what may be found in Islam and in other religions. Many of the great mystics, saints and spiritual masters have written in a similar way about the need for detachment and the virtues of the spiritual path. Some of the scriptures of other religions are parallel to the quotations from the Baha'i scriptures given above. Where the Baha'i teachings do differ is in the practical details and structures that are given for ascending the spiritual path.
In many other spiritual traditions, the practical aspects of the spiritual path have been put in the hands of a spiritual guide: the priest of a community, the guru, the shaykh or murshid of a Sufi order, the abbot of a monastery. In many spiritual traditions, because the world has been recognised as being the source of our distraction from the spiritual path, the adherents of that tradition have been advised to remove themselves from the world, either as ascetics or in a monastic community. The Baha'i teachings advise against both of these aspects of the path.
Baha'u'llah reveals that the use of a human spiritual guide is a dangerous practice. While undoubtedly genuine spiritual leaders do exist, many are also fraudulent or lead people into error. God has ordained that the day of the religious leader or professional - whether shaykh, molla, priest, guru, or monk - is over. Each individual now has the obligation of reading the scriptures for himself or herself and understanding the spiritual path for himself or herself.
Leaders of religion, in every age, have hindered their people from attaining the shores of eternal salvation, inasmuch as they held the reins of authority in their mighty grasp. Some for the lust of leadership, others through want of knowledge and understanding, have been the cause of the deprivation of the people. By their sanction and authority, every Prophet of God hath drunk from the chalice of sacrifice, and winged His flight unto the heights of glory. What unspeakable cruelties they that have occupied the seats of authority and learning have inflicted upon the true Monarchs of the world, those Gems of divine virtue! Content with a transitory dominion, they have deprived themselves of an everlasting sovereignty. Thus, their eyes beheld not the light of the countenance of the Well-Beloved, nor did their ears hearken unto the sweet melodies of the Bird of Desire. For this reason, in all sacred books mention hath been made of the divines of every age.(20)
Baha'u'llah reveals that while monasteries and spiritual asceticism may have had some role to play in the past, these are no longer appropriate today.
The pious deeds of the monks and priests among the followers of the Spirit [Jesus] - upon Him be the peace of God - are remembered in His presence. In this Day, however, let them give up the life of seclusion and direct their steps towards the open world and busy themselves with that which will profit themselves and others.(21)
God states that this physical world, far from obstructing us in our spiritual quest, has, in fact, been created specifically to help us:
O Son of Bounty! Out of the wastes of nothingness, with the clay of My command I made thee to appear, and have ordained for thy training every atom in existence and the essence of all created things. Thus, ere thou didst issue from thy mother's womb, I destined for thee two founts of gleaming milk, eyes to watch over thee, and hearts to love thee. Out of My loving-kindness, 'neath the shade of My mercy I nurtured thee, and guarded thee by the essence of My grace and favor. And My purpose in all this was that thou mightest attain My everlasting dominion and become worthy of My invisible bestowals. And yet heedless thou didst remain, and when fully grown, thou didst neglect all My bounties and occupied thyself with thine idle imaginings, in such wise that thou didst become wholly forgetful, and, turning away from the portals of the Friend didst abide within the courts of My enemy.(22)
The scriptures thus pictures this physical world as a giant classroom where human beings are obtaining spiritual education. We have not, however, been left to our own devices but have had spiritual educators, the founders of the world religions who give us the instructions we need to progress spiritually. Baha'u'llah reveals that we can best achieve this progress by living in the world not seeking to cut ourselves off from it. While a certain amount of removal from the world may be necessary in order to pray and meditate, which all religions tell us is important, we must also engage in the world so that the spiritual qualities we are seeking to acquire may be perfected. How will we know if we have acquired such spiritual qualities as love, justice, trustworthiness, and truthfulness, unless we live in the world and put ourselves to the test in the concrete situations of daily life?
Part of our spiritual progress is the spiritual discipline of saying daily prayers and meditating, observing an annual fast, and other laws. This pattern of life keeps us in touch with our true spiritual reality and connects us with the spiritual world which is the source of our strength. Such laws have been given in every religion. Baha'u'llah has revealed similar laws (see Bahá'í Laws).
Lastly, Baha'u'llah has given us a substitute for the spiritual communities of other religions, to take the place of monasteries and communities led by abbots, shaykhs and gurus. He has created the Baha'i community, a structure that involves every one in such activities as consultation and united action in service to others, activities which help us in acquiring the virtues that we should seek to acquire (see What we must become). The ideal of unity and the mechanisms of consultation (see Consultation) in the Baha'i community compel us to recognise faults of egotism and arrogance within ourselves and to try to remedy these. The ideal of consultation requires us to perfect within ourselves the qualities of patience, forebearence, justice and other virtues. Within the Baha'i community, spiritual development becomes the responsibility and prerogative of everyone not a select group of monks or religious professionals.
Within the Baha'i community structure, authority and obedience do not go to individuals such as mollas, shaykhs, priests and gurus, they go to elected institutions. For spiritual guidance, Baha'is are advised to take advantage of the mechanisms of consultation so as to obtain the collective wisdom of a group of people and not the whims and comparatively limited knowledge of a single individual.
NOTES
1. Baha'u'llah, Gleanings, no. 106, pp. 213
2. Baha'u'llah, Arabic Hidden Words, no. 13
3. Baha'u'llah, Arabic Hidden Words, no. 56

رازهاي صندوق قرمز اسناد مجلس پس از 24 سال در حضور نسخهشناسان و پژوهشگران بازگو ميشود.