Creation - Keven Brown 2003

8/14/2019 Creation - Keven Brown 2003

1/16

Creation

by Keven BrownSept. 2003, version 5

The Bah teachings on creation correspond with many of the central ideas affirmed in theJudeo-Christian-Muslim tradition, in Greek philosophy, and, in places, they parallel theoriesfound in non-Western religions. Taken as a whole, they present a new synthesis of ancient and

more recent cosmological teachings. Their importance to the history of intellectual thoughtderives in part from the fact that they appear in the form of a prophetic revelation at a timewhen modern Western ideas were also beginning to penetrate nineteenth century Iran andintermix with its enduring medieval conceptual milieu.

1. The Nature of the Creator

To understand the meaning of creation from a Bah perspective requires understandingsomething of the nature of the Creator. As the Supreme Being through which the existence of allother things is realized, the Creator exists outside of His creation. He is not a force inside theuniverse, nor is creation the manifestation or extension of His existence, as some Sufis have

proposed. The designation Creator is quite appropriate, as it implies a separation between theCreator and the things created, in the sense that what is created only becomes fashioned throughthe intermediary of instruments and tools. For example, it is the paintbrush in the hand of the

painter that is the direct cause of the creation of the painting. In the same way, according to theBah teachings, God creates through the intermediary of the Primal Will, which is Hisinstrument for calling all created things into being. The Primal Will, therefore, is the direct causeof the universe, while the Creator is said to be the Originator of the cause of causes (Abdul-Bah, Selections, p. 61).

If the Creator is outside of creation, then what can we really know about His being? Abdul-Bah describes the situation by this analogy: Man is like unto a tiny organism contained withina fruit; this fruit hath developed out of the blossom, the blossom hath grown out of the tree, thetree is sustained by the sap, and the sap formed out of earth and water. How then can this tinyorganism comprehend the nature of the garden, conceive of the gardener and comprehend his

being? That is manifestly impossible (Bah World Faith, p. 343). Yet by the power of reasonand reflection, according to Abdul-Bah, we can realize that the gardener must exist. Hecontinues: Should that organism understand and reflect, it would observe that this garden, thistree, this blossom, this fruit would in nowise have come to exist by themselves in such order and

perfection. Similarly the wise and reflecting soul will know of a certainty that this infiniteuniverse with all it grandeur and order could not have come to exist by itself (pp. 343-344).

Bahullh affirms the essential ungraspability of the Creators being: He [God] hath fromeverlasting been immeasurably exalted above the understanding of His creatures and sanctifiedfrom the conceptions of His servants....From everlasting Thou hast been a treasure hidden fromthe sight and minds of men and shalt continue to remain the same for ever and ever (Tablets ofBahullh, pp. 112-114). He also emphasizes that the Creator is exalted above all comparisonsand likenesses with which men have compared Him. He hath erred grievously who hathmistaken these comparisons and likenesses for God Himself (Gleanings, pp. 336-337).Difference in degree of existence and lack of similarity in essential being are barriers tounderstanding (Some Answered Questions, pp. 146-147, Maktb, vol. 2, pp. 44-47).

Nevertheless, the existence of such a being can be proved by rational arguments. Traditionalcreation-, ontological-, and design-based proofs for the existence of God are given by Abdul-

Bah, as well as a modern proof based on the composition of things (see Some AnsweredQuestions, pp. 3-6; Amr va Khalq, vol. 1, pp. 42-58).

1


2/16

Because the true nature of the Creators attributes cannot be grasped by the human mind, Bahtexts take the negative approach toward them:

As to the attributes and perfections such as will, knowledge, power and other ancient attributesthat we ascribe to that Divine Reality, these are the signs that reflect the existence of beings inthe visible plane and not the absolute perfections of the Divine Essence that cannot becomprehended. For instance...we infer that the Ancient Power on whom dependeth the existence

of these beings cannot be ignorant; thus we say He is All-Knowing. It is certain that it is notimpotent, it must be then All-Powerful....The purpose is to show that these attributes andperfections that we recount for that Universal Reality are only in order to deny imperfections,rather than to assert [that God possesses] the perfections that the human mind can conceive.(Bah World Faith, pp. 342-343)

This position is important, and cannot be over emphasized, because it explains why Bah textsare able to resolve certain philosophical difficulties that have led many thinkers into nets ofcontradiction because they have relied upon a literal likeness between the attributes of God andthe attributes of man.

A good example is the question of Gods knowledge. Abdul-Bah says that the advocates ofthe doctrine of the unity of existence (wa dat al-wujd) compared Gods knowledge to humanknowledge in order to prove their theory. He repeats their proof thus:

All beings are things known of God; and knowledge without things known does not exist, forknowledge is related to that which exists, and not to nothingness....Therefore, the realities of

beings, which are things known of God the Most High, have an intelligible existence, since theyare divine intelligible forms; and they are preexistent, as the Divine Knowledge is preexistent.As this knowledge is preexistent, the things known are equally so, and the individualizations andthe specifications of beings, which are the preexistent objects of Gods knowledge, are theDivine Knowledge itself. For the reality of the Divine Being, knowledge, and the things known,have an absolute unity which is real and established. Otherwise, the Divine Being would becomethe place of multiple phenomena, and a plurality of preexistences would become necessary,which is absurd. So it is proved that the things known constitute knowledge itself, andknowledge the Essence itself--that is to say, that the Knower, the knowledge, and the thingsknown are one single reality. (Some Answered Questions, p. 291).[1]

In refutation of this proof Abdul-Bah says:

Briefly, with regard to this theory that all things are realized through the One [God], this isagreed upon by the philosophers and the Prophets. But there is a difference between them. The

Prophets say the knowledge of God has no need of the existence of beings, but the knowledge ofthe creature requires the existence of objects of knowledge; if the knowledge of God had need ofany other thing, then it would be the knowledge of the creature, and not the knowledge of God,for the preexistent is different from the created, and the created is opposed to the

preexistent.Therefore, the preexistence of the specifications and individualizations of beings,which are the things known of God, does not exist. These divine and perfect attributes[belonging to Gods Essence] cannot be encompassed by rational perception in order to judgewhether the knowledge of God needs objects of knowledge or not. (Some Answered Questions,

pp. 293-294)[2]

Averroes shared the same opinion when he clarified in his Decisive Treatise (Kitb fa l al-

maql):

2


3/16

God, the Exalted, knows them [particulars] in a way that is not of the same kind as our way ofknowing them. For our knowledge of them is an effect of the object known, originated when itcomes into existence and changing when it changes; whereas Glorious Gods knowledge ofexistence is the opposite of this; it is the cause of the object known, which is an existent being.Thus to suppose the two kinds of knowledge similar to each other is to identify the essences and

properties of opposite things, and that is the extreme of ignorance. (quoted in Medieval PoliticalPhilosophy, p. 172)

All of this is not to deny that the Creator may actually have the attributes ascribed to Him, butthat if He has them, they exist in Him in a way that is different and more perfect than the waythey exist in His creatures. As being without mind and consciousness is considered animperfection, we say [that] that Reality has a consciousness....But the consciousness of God isdifferent from the consciousness of man (quoted in Goodall, Daily Lessons Received at Akk,

p. 29).

2. The Relation Between Creator and Created

The relation between the Creator and the created is one of voluntary emanation ( udr).

Creatures emanate from God, as speech proceeds from a speaker, action from an actor, andwriting from a writer (Some Answered Questions, pp. 202-206). The speech, the action, and thewriting all depend completely upon that from which they proceed, but they are not consubstantialwith it or comparable to it. Abdul-Bah contrasts this view with that of those Sufis who saythat creatures are the manifestation ( uhr or tajall) of the Creator:

The Sufis say: The realities of things are the manifestations of the real One. But the Prophetssay: They emanate from the real One, and great is the difference between manifestation andemanation. Appearance by manifestation means that a single thing appears in infinite forms. Forexample, the seed, which is a single thing possessing the vegetative perfections, which itmanifests in infinite forms, becomes resolved into branches, leaves, flowers, and fruits. This iscalled appearance by manifestation. Whereas in appearance by emanation the real One remainsand continues in the exaltation of Its sanctity.The real One can be compared to the sun. Therays of the sun emanate from it and shine upon all created things, but the sun remains in theheights of its loftiness; it does not descend or resolve itself into the forms of the rays, nor does itappear in the identity of things through specification and individualization. (Some AnsweredQuestions, pp. 294-295)[3]

Though both parties agree that by God all things are realized, and by Him all beings haveattained to existence (Some Answered Questions, p. 203), the Sufi doctrine of manifestationwould make the act of creation necessary, not voluntary. The seed, for example, of necessity

must manifest the potentialities latent within it. It cannot yield what it does not already possess.This view corresponds with that of many Muslim philosophers, including Avicenna, whobelieved that the procession of creatures from God is necessary, hence ruling out creation as avoluntary act on the part of God (cf. Marmura, Conflict over the Worlds Pre-eternity, chapter 1).The reason the philosophers have said that Gods creation is necessary is because of theiridentification of God with the first direct cause of creation, and cause and effect, in this sense,necessarily entail each other (in the same way that fire necessarily entails heat). On this basis,they also argued that the creation is eternal, because that which is caused as a necessary effectalways exists together with its cause. The Bah view, as quoted above, is that God is theOriginator of the first natural cause of created things, but not Himself such a cause. For werenecessity to accurately describe the relation between God and creation, the true meaning of

creation would be negated, which implies the power to freely create something new and novelfrom what is outside oneself. As summed up by Etienne Gilson, the philosophers who examined

3


4/16

these problems with the help of reason alone were never able to rise to the Christian notion of afree God (History of Christian Philosophy, p. 466).

How then do the Bah Writings resolve these two important questions: (1) Is creation eternal,as the philosophers say, or did it have a beginning, as the theologians assert? (2) If God is not thefirst cause in the chain of natural causation, how did He create the universe?

In answer to the first question, Bahullh indicates that both standpoints are true from a certainperspective:

As regards thine assertions about the beginning of creation, this is a matter on which conceptionsvary by reason of the divergences in mens thoughts and opinions. Wert thou to assert that it hathever existed and shall continue to exist, it would be true; or wert thou to affirm the same conceptas is mentioned in the sacred Scriptures, no doubt would there be about it, for it hath beenrevealed by God, the Lord of the worlds. Indeed He was a hidden treasure. This is a station thatcan never be described nor even alluded to. And in the station of I did wish to make Myselfknown, God was, and His creation had ever existed beneath His shelter from the beginning thathath no beginning, apart from its being preceded by a Firstness which cannot be regarded as

firstness and originated by a Cause inscrutable even unto all men of learning. (Tablets ofBahullh, p. 140).

The standpoint from which the eternity of creation is true is with respect to time. There neverwas a time when the creation did not exist. In the station of I did wish to make Myself known,God, as known by names and attributes, has always had a creation. The standpoint from whichthe beginning of creation is true is with respect to existence. In other words, to speak of God as

being before His creation refers to an essential (or ontological) priority to creation, but not to atemporal priority. The Firstness that Bahullh mentions above refers to the fact that allcreated things have a cause which logically precedes them. As Bahullh states: The one trueGod hath everlastingly existed, and will everlastingly continue to exist. His creation, likewise,hath had no beginning, and will have no end. All that is created, however, is preceded by acause (Gleanings, p. 162).

This fact of Gods ontological, but not temporal, priority to creation is how Bahullh explainsthose saying attributed to the Prophets of old, such as In the beginning was God; there was nocreature to know Him, and The Lord was alone; with no one to adore Him. He continues: Tothis same truth bear witness these words which He hath revealed: God was alone; there wasnone else besides Him. He will always remain what He hath ever been. Every discerning eyewill readily perceive that the Lord is now manifest, yet there is none to recognize His glory. Bythis is meant that the habitation wherein the Divine Being dwelleth is far above the reach and ken

of any one besides Him (Gleanings, pp. 150-151). God, therefore, can always be described asbeing alone and with no one to adore Him, because His state of existence utterly transcendsthe state of contingent existence.

There is a case, however, in which Gods existence precedes the existence of the universe bothessentially and temporally, and that is with respect to its parts. Abdul-Bah explains: Yes, itmay be that one of the parts of the universe, one of the globes, for example, may come intoexistence, or may be disintegrated, but the other endless globes are still existing; the universewould not be disordered nor destroyed.As each globe has a beginning, necessarily it has anend, because every composition, collective or particular, must of necessity be decomposed(Some Answered Questions, p. 180). In the light of recent advances in astronomy and theoretical

physics, what Abdul-Bah means by a globe or a part of the universe can now beunderstood to be a galaxy, a galactic cluster, or even a particular universe. Similar to Hindu

4


5/16

cosmology, Bah texts hold that cycles of creation and destruction in the world of existence arenecessary (Some Answered Questions, pp. 160-161).

3. The Act of Creation

Gods motive for bringing the creation into being is essentially twofold. The first is love: Iloved thy creation, hence I created thee (Bahullh, Hidden Words, p. 6). This love is a

bountiful outpouring that has always existed and will never cease. Abdul-Bah affirms: Loveis the cause of Gods revelation unto man, the vital bond inherent, in accordance with divinecreation, in the realities of all things (Selections, p. 27). The second motive, which has already

been mentioned, is Gods desire to reveal Himself and to be known.

The first thing to emanate from God, in the station of wishing to be known, is the Primal Will,which Abdul-Bah identifies with the First Intellect of the ancient philosophers (SomeAnswered Questions, p. 203). In conventional religious terminology, it is known as the Word ofGod and His Command (Tablets of Bahullh, pp. 140-41). In the terminology of Plato, thePrimal Will corresponds to the Idea of the Good, which, consequently, emanates from theBeing who is good. Abdul-Bah explains that this Will is without beginning or end (i.e.,

having temporal preexistence), whereas only God has both essential and temporal preexistence.Essential preexistence is an existence which is not preceded by a cause (Some AnsweredQuestions, pp. 203, 280). The Will, therefore, although originated by a cause, is co-eternal withGod and precedes space and time. Space and time unfold from it as its necessary effects. It is theact by which God, as the agent, calls the rest of creation into being (Tablets of Bahullh, p.140; Kitb-i-qn, p. 98), as is also recounted in the Biblical story of genesis, the gospel of John(1:1-3), and such Qurnic verses as When God decrees a thing He has only to say to it Be! andit is (2:117).

God creates all things through the intermediary of His Will, but what about the Will itself?According to the Bb, God created the Will through itself:

God, verily, created the Will from nothing through itself, then He created through it all that towhich the name thing can be applied. The cause of its existence, in truth, is its own self andnaught else. Those who believe that the Essence is the cause of creation have made themselves

partners with Him.It is established in philosophy that cause and effect are alike. Therefore, theImm hath declared: The cause of things is His fashioning, but He is not its cause. (Amr vaKhalq, vol. 1, pp. 100-101)

In the first sentence, the Bb is repeating the dictum of the sixth Imm, Jafar diq, who stated:God created the Will through itself, then He created all things through the Will (quoted in Idris

Hamid, Metaphysics, p. 174, footnote). This doctrine of the Will being its own immediate causewas also supported by Christian philosophers, such as Augustine and Duns Scotus (see Gilson,History of Christian Philosophy, pp. 73, 463). The intent of this passage is to emphasize that Godis not that kind of cause defined in philosophy as that whose existence immediately and withoutconceivable delay necessitates the existence of something else (Suhraward, Philosophy ofIllumination, p. 43). God is not this kind of cause; His being does not automatically entail theexistence of creatures as effects, nor does it automatically entail an act of will, since God maychoose to will something or not to will it. According to the theologians, the correct term for Godis agent (fil), not cause (sabab), because the term agent is applicable to a living, willing,knowing being, who is not compelled to create or act out of necessity or by nature (see Marmura,Conflict over the Worlds Pre-eternity, p. 12 ff.).

Shaykh A mad A s, also, often quoted the above statements of the Imm diq. Heidentified Gods willing with His acting and His fashioning, and he distinguished the actor,

5


6/16

i.e., God, from both the acting and the effect of the acting. These threeactor, acting, andeffectconstitute three separate realms of being related through emanation. Just as primarymatter does not require another matter through which it subsists, willing does not require anotheract of will by which it is willed, but it is willed through itself; otherwise an infinite regress wouldensue. Thus, the Being who wills is not identical to the act of willing, nor is the will identical tothe object willed. This does not imply, of course, that the Will is independent of the Being whowills. The Primal Will is always with God and is utterly dependent upon God as its agent.

These three distinct ontological levels are inscribed on the Bah ringstone symbol as the worldsof God, Command, and creation. The Primal Will, which is the world of Command, itselfconsists, in a subsequent stage, of the inner realities (i.e. intelligible forms and essences) of thethings created. Abdul-Bah explains: The world of Command is the station of the Primal Will,which is a universal reality ( aqqat-i-kullyyih) that is resolved into infinite forms, like the seainto waves (Maktb, vol. 2, p. 141). In another place, he describes this station as the firstemanation from Godwhich appears in infinite forms in the realities of all things and becomesspecified and individualized according to the disposition and capacity of the essences of things(Some Answered Questions, p. 295).[4] In everyday language, an essence, reality, or intelligibleform is like the plan or design of something that exists in the mind of its creator before it is

called into actual existence. In the Bah Writings, this stage of the creative Act is calledpredestination or predetermination (qadar). All together the Bah Writings describe sevenstages of Gods creative Act, three of which are hidden in the atemporal dimension, and four ofwhich are manifested in time. These seven stages will be elaborated upon more later.

Many of the philosophers share a similar conception of the nature of the First Intellect. Forinstance, Avicenna writes: This intellect is not...the true God, the First. For although in onerespect this first intellect is one, it is multiple inasmuch as it consists of the forms of numerousuniversals (quoted in Medieval Political Philosophy, pp. 117-118). Typically, Avicennareserves the function of providing the forms and matter of the sublunar world to the ActiveIntellect, which is the tenth intellect in an emanational hierarchy proceeding from the FirstCause. This hierarchy of ten intermediate intellects, each corresponding to a heavenly sphere,

between God and the realm of physical matter is not found in Bah cosmology. Rather, a singleuniversal intellect, now termed the Primal Will, performs this function.

Abdul-Bah, in the tradition of the Platonic philosophers, does not consider the inner realitiesof things in the Will to be mere nominal constructs. Rather, they have a reality in comparison towhich outward things are but a fleeting image. He says: That which thou beholdest in thistemporal world are the fleeting shadows of the world of the Kingdom and the external images ofthe celestial realm. This is why thou observest that these shadows and forms are continuously

being renewed. They are not permanent, but the succession of similar forms and like states is

such as to give the appearance of constancy. In the end, however, it will become clear that it wasa mirage, not real water; illusions, not the realities of the signs (Muntakhabt, vol. 3, p. 23). Therealities of the signs are akin, if not identical, to the eternal Forms of Plato, which, like thelaws of nature posited by modern science, govern the temporal unfolding of outer phenomena.Suhraward explains that Platos Forms are not nominal predicates of the many (as are universalsin logic), but real luminous essences, the roots of the many. They are termed universal onlyinsofar as they bear the same relation of emanation to many actualized individuals. Suhrawarddesignates them the lords of the species (arbb al-anw ) (see Harawi, Anvriyyih, pp. 41-42),an expression which Bahullh confirms in a Tablet in which He explains the meaning of theactive force mentioned in the Tablet of Wisdom. In that Tablet, He says: The intention of theactive force is the lord of the species, and it hath other meanings (thr-i-Qalam Al, vol. 7, p.

113).

6


7/16

The Tablet of Wisdom contains many of Bahullhs most important statements on the subjectof creation. In a key passage, He affirms both the evolution of the temporal universe and theneed of complementary active and recipient principles for its realization:

That which hath been in existence had existed before, but not in the form thou seest today. Theworld of existence came into being through the heat generated from the interaction between theactive force and that which is its recipient. These two are the same, yet they are different. Thus

doth the Great Announcement inform thee about this glorious structure. Such as communicatethe generating influence and such as receive its impact are indeed created through the irresistibleWord of God, which is the Cause of the entire creation, while all else besides His Word are butthe creatures and effects thereof. (Tablets of Bahullh, p. 140)

This passage has been explained by Abdul-Bah. In regard to the first sentence, he says: Fromthis blessed verse it is clear and evident that the universe is evolving. In the opinion of the

philosophers and the wise this fact of the development and evolution of the world of existence isalso established. That is to say, it is progressively transferred from one state to another. Inregard to the next two sentences, he states: The substance and primary matter of contingent

beings is the ethereal power, which is invisible and known only through its effects, such as

electricity, heat, and lightthese are vibrations of that power, and this is established and provenin natural philosophy and is known as the ethereal matter. This ethereal matter is itself both theactive force and its recipient (Midiy-i-smn, vol. 2, p. 69).

Now, first we have Bahullh affirming that the active force is the lord of the species, inother words, the Platonic Forms or realities of things. But Abdul-Bah states that etherealmatter is meant. This seeming contradiction is easily resolved, because what is being referred tois simultaneously two things, neither of which can be realized without the other. These two arematter and form, or in other terms, existence and essence. This ontological polarity principle isalso a cornerstone of the philosophy of Shaykh A mad, who proposed that matter and formlogically require each other in order to exist. Hence, matter, which receives Gods action,

becomes active in relation to the form it takes on, which, in turn, is active in relation to thatwhich it acts upon. These two together are the inseparable common ground of all creatures,whether they be eternal and intelligible or perishable and material. As Idris Hamid expresses it:Every created, contingent thing is a complex of acting (fil) and becoming-in-yielding-to-acting(infil) (Metaphysics and Cosmology of Process, p., 136). The Bb confirms this essentialduality at the basis of contingent existence. He explains: With the exception of God, nothingcan subsist through itself. All things are composite. Once this duality is established, connectionis also established, for a thing cannot be a thing except through its existence, which is the aspectof manifestation (tajall) in it, through its essence, which is the aspect of receiving (qubl), andthrough connection (rab ), which is realized after the union [of the first two] (INBA, vol. 14, p.

268).Since logically the action of God cannot produce an effect from absolute nothingness, themedium of matter, which is like the screen for a painter, must in some manner preexist, thoughwithout any definable characteristics whatsoever. This is confirmed by Abdul-Bah when heexplains: If it be said that such a thing came into existence from nonexistence, this does notrefer to absolute nonexistence, but means that its former condition in relation to its actualcondition was nothingness. For absolute nothingness cannot find existence, as it has not thecapacity of existence (Some Answered Questions, p. 281). Shoghi Effendi also clarifies that thestatement of Bahullh in Gleanings: Who out of utter nothingness hath created the reality ofall things (pp. 64-65) should be taken in a symbolic and not a literal sense (Letters to

Australia and New Zealand, p. 41). The divine act of creation, therefore, is the actualization ofpreexisting potential and not calling into being from absolute nothingness, which Abdul-Bahtells us is impossible. God, therefore, is still the creator of matter insofar as it is actualized

7


8/16

through His action. In itself matter is non-being, but the action of God gives it being by giving itform.

This is similar to the idea of the indefinite Dyad said to be taught by Plato (see Reale, Plato andAristotle, pp. 65-70). The Dyad is not the number two but the principle of duality, a kind ofintelligible, indeterminate matter, either infinitely great or infinitely small, capable of taking on amultiplicity of forms through the action of the One, which determines it. The Dyad is like the

canvas upon which God paints.[5] From the interaction of these two principles, therefore, beingis produced as a unity of determination and indetermination, of limit and unlimited. In God, orthe One, there is no polarity, for His existence is identical to His essence, and vice versa. It is atthe level of the Primal Will, or the World of Command, that the duality of existence and essence,matter and form, arises. These two principles are symbolically expressed in the Bah Writings

by the two letters B and E, or Kf and Nn, which together form the imperative commandBe! (kun). The Bb affirms: Through the B God created the matter of all things, andthrough the E God created the form of all things (quoted in Afnn, Tafsr-i-Bismillh, p.126). He also refers to them as the father and the mother of all things, and identifies them withthe stages of Gods Will (mashyyat) and Purpose (irdah), the first two of the seven stages ofcreation. Nothing in creation exists which is not a composite effect of these two active and

recipient principles.

In order for the Primal Will (as Dyad receiving act) to be resolved into the infinite intelligibleforms of created things, it needs the creative energies of the names and attributes of God.Abdul-Bah attests that God hath ordained these names and attributes to be the first principleof giving existence in the world of creation and the source of the different grades of realities inthe degrees of existence (Maktb, vol. 1, p.13). These names and attributes, therefore, are thehighest members of hierarchy of intelligible existence in the world of the Primal Will. They areactually and forever existing and not potential. Because they convey life, they are called Life-giving; because they provide, they are called Bountiful, the Provider; because they create, theyare called Creator; because they educate and govern, the name Lord God is applied (Abdul-Bah, Promulgation, p. 219). The other intelligible realities are structures and manifestations ofthese divine names.

Unlike Gods essential attributes, which are identical to His Essence and exhibit no need, thesenames and attributes are of a very different nature. They are originated and require the existenceof objects or creatures upon which they have been bestowed and in which they have becomemanifest (Promulgation, p. 219). Thus, every inner reality in the world of Command requires anouter reality that corresponds to it and is its expression. Nature, in its essence, is an intelligiblereality (Some Answered Questions, p. 84); it is both Gods Will and its expression (Tabletsof Bahullh, p. 142). Abdul Bah explains that all of the realities and conditions which the

philosophers attribute to nature are the same as have been attributed to the Primal Will in theHoly Scriptures (M'idiy-i smn, vol. 2, p. 70). All particular phenomena to which we attachthe name beautiful, for example, are expressions, in part, of the originated attribute of beautythat exists eternally in the world of the Will.

According to Bahullh, the names are garments for these originated attributes, which in turnare identical to Gods creative actions. He explains:

In another station, the names are garments for the attributes, since an attribute is an act beingmanifested by an actor, such as giving something or causing one thing to prevail over another.Thus whatever is manifested by the actor appeareth through the stages of his will and his power.

This act is made manifest as an effect of the action produced by the actor. When God purposedto make His action manifest in His realm, reveal it upon His earth, establish it in His land, andmake it a perpetual word and a clear sign, He clothed it in the garment of names. This is the

8


9/16

same as when ye say [of certain acts]: this is munificent, this is discerning, this isinformed, and so forth with similar names. If these actions were not named by these names,they would not become known and made manifest. Nothing in the heavens or on the earth canexist unless it is under the shadow of certain names among His names. For example, if thou seestthe knowledge of a learned person, be assured that this knowledge hath appeared as a result ofthe effulgence of the name of God the Knowing. If thou observest the power of a powerfulindividual, know that this power oweth its existence to its reflection of the name the Powerful. In

like manner, the loftiness of the sky is a consequence of His name the Exalted, the radiance ofthe sun is a consequence of His name the Luminous, the stability of the earth is a consequence ofHis name the Imperturbable, the flowing of water is a consequence of His name the Fluid, andthe blowing of wind is a consequence of His name the Sender. (from the Tafsr-i-Hu,International Bah Archives, unpublished manuscript, no. BC003/070/00084 C)

In his commentary upon the Islamic declaration: In the name of God, the Merciful, theCompassionate, Abdul-Bah also explains how the divine names are given existence at thelevel of unity-multiplicity (i.e., that of the Primal Will), not that of absolute oneness:

The names of God derive from those attributes which are the perfections [acts] belonging to the

reality of the Essence. In the station of the absolute oneness (a adyya) of the Essence, thesenames have neither manifestation nor distinction, and no trace, indication, or sign, for they aredispositions that belong to the Essence in the mode of simplicity and original oneness. Rather, itis in the station of unity-multiplicity (w idyya) that the names become manifested,distinguished, realized, established, and given existencean existence which emanateth from themerciful Reality and giveth rise to spiritual realities and heavenly essences at the level of thefixed archetypes (a'yn thbita).So in this regard, namely, that of the absolute oneness of theEssence, the name is the same as the named and equivalent to His reality and His identity. It hathno existence additional to and apart from the Essence. For existence is either identical to essence,or different from it. And if it is different from it, we must ask whether it is a requisite of it and itsconcomitant without cancellation or separation, or is it possible for it to be canceled andseparated.

The first is applicable to the reality of the Essence in the station of absolute oneness. Hisexistence is the same as His essence, and His essence is the same as His existence. The second isapplicable to the station of necessity [i.e., the Primal Will], where existence is distinct fromessence, though the former is a concomitant of the latter in such a way that separation anddisassociation are inconceivable and unimaginable, since existence is an essential attribute ofessence. The third is applicable to the station of contingency, where somethings existence isacquired from another and obtained from that which is beyond itself. In this case, its existence isother than its essence, its essence is other than its existence, and the separation and disassociation

of these two are possible. (Maktb, vol. 1, pp. 49-50).These three kinds of existence, or relationships between essence and existence, whichcorrespond to the worlds of God, Command, and creation, have been termed by Shaykh Ahmadreal existence (al-wujd al- aqq), absolute existence (al-wujd al-mu laq), and delimitedexistence (al-wujd al-muqayyad) (Hamid, Metaphysics and Cosmology of Process, p. 97).Real existence, in which essence and existence are identical, belongs only to God. Absoluteexistence, in which essence and existence are distinct but inseparable, belongs to the Primal Willand to the realities of things. Delimited existence, which Abdul-Bah also describes as anaccident occurring to the realities of things, (Maktb, vol. 3, p. 354), and which can beseparated from them, belongs to the external world.

As for the fixed archetypes mentioned in the above passage, this is another expression for therealities of things. As explained by Sajd, according to the wayfarers, these are intelligible

9


10/16

forms in the world of God; and in the terminology of the theosophists, they are the essences ofthings. The archetypes are the forms of the divine names, and souls are manifestations of thearchetypes (Farhang-i-I il t-i-Irfn., p. 115).

Abdul-Bah agrees with Aristotle that the existence of each thing depends on four causes: theefficient cause, the formal cause, the material cause, and the final cause (Some AnsweredQuestions, p. 280). The Bah Writings also recognize, like Plato, the existence of intelligible

formal causes that transcend the material world, which are the powers or laws through whichphysical things are enabled to appear in increasingly complex systems of order. Such realities donot enter or exit, descend or ascend, but are described as placeless, all-pervasive, and having adirect connection to things, like images reflected in a mirror (Some Answered Questions, p.108). At the lowest end of the intelligible hierarchy in the spiritual worlds, at the border ofmaterial existence, the matter-form, active-recipient duality is termed ether or etherealmatter (mddiy-i-athryyih) by Abdul-Bah, and the effects by which it can be known includeelectricity, heat, and light. Abdul-Bah says it is the sign of the Primal Will in the world ofcorporeal beings (Midiy-i-smn, vol. 2, p. 69). From the heat generated by the interactionof these two opposites, the active force and that which is its recipient, the universe unfolds,declares Bahullh (Tablets of Bahullh, p. 140). It is interesting to recall here Aristotles

assertion in the Physics (188a): That opposites are principles is universally agreed. For theprinciples must come neither from one another nor from anything else, and everything else mustcome from them.

Neither the intelligible formal causes nor their reflective medium, ethereal matter, constitute thephysical realm, but the physical realm is the reflection itself, which is subject to constanttransformation. The physical is also expressed as the motion or vibration that occurs in theethereal medium (Midiy-i-smn, vol. 2, p. 69; Some Answered Questions, p. 190), and asan accident occurring to or inhering in the realities of things (Maktb, vol. 3, p. 354;Mufva t, p. 203). It is through accidents that the realities of things can be particularized andtemporally manifested. What defines the material realm is not matter, which is an essential

principle of both the material and spiritual worlds, but the ability of something to becomedecomposed after composition. Abdul-Bah explains, for example, that because the soul ofman is not a composition of diverse elementsand is not subject to decompositionit is ever-living, immortal, and eternal. He continues: The people of truth hold that all material existents,even those which the scientists of today consider simple, if investigated carefully and examinedclosely, will also be found to be composed [and therefore capable of being decomposed](Khi bt, vol. 1, pp. 145-146). This was quite prescient of Abdul-Bah, who made thisstatement in 1911 at a time when atoms where still commonly believed to be indivisible.

Abdul-Bahs explanation of the origin of the elements is very similar to current theories

regarding the origin of the ninety-two stable atomic elements: The elementary matter of each ofthese great existents was originally one. That one matter [then] appeared in a particular formin each element. Thus various forms were produced, and these various forms as they were

produced became permanent, and each element was specialized. But this permanence was notdefinite, and did not attain realization and perfect existence until after a very long time.Then...from the composition and combination of these elements innumerable beings appeared(Some Answered Questions, p. 181).[6] Bahullh, like the ancient philosophers, divides theelements into four basic kinds: earth (solid), water (liquid), air (gaseous), and fire (radiant), andaffirms that through these four states of matter God fashioned the physical creation (Midiy-i-smn, vol. 4, p. 82).

Abdul-Bah explains that every being hath come to exist under numerous influences andcontinually undergoeth reaction. These influences, too, are formed under the action of still otherinfluences....Such process of causation goes on until it leads to the Ultimate Cause (Bah

10


11/16

World Faith, p. 343). This process should not be seen as a going back in time but asdiscovering prior or essential causes outside of time. Abdul-Bah denies that formation is

possible by accident (i.e., chance), since for every effect there must be a cause (Bah WorldFaith, p. 342). He says the same of formation by necessity, because then the formation must bean inherent property of the constituent parts and...under such circumstances the decomposition ofany formation is impossible (Bah World Faith, p. 342). This leaves, he says, voluntaryformation, i.e., formation by the agency of the Primal Will, of which the will of each thing is an

expression.

Abdu'l-Bah affirms that the attribute of volition in Gods act of creation extends in some senseto all created things, and that this is necessary to uphold the justice and mercy of God. He says:Created things and the recipients of Gods action have each accepted a degree of existenceaccording to their own pleasure and desire (Maktb, vol. 2, p. 38). Creation thus entails both avoluntary act on the part of the Creator and a voluntary act to receive existence on the part of thecreated, according to its own disposition.

The jewish philosopher Maimonides made a similar observation. He noted that if the existence ofthe world was by necessity, nothing could then fail to be other than as it is. But this would

imply that nothing can diverge in any way from the nature which it has (Qtd. in Goodman,Jewish and Islamic Philosophy, p. 98). Maimonides explains that only voluntarism allows forchange in the nature of things, that is, evolution, as a means of bringing creation to maturity.

The formation of things through this Will, also equated with nature by Abdul-Bah (seeabove), comprises seven stages. The first stage is the Will itself, and the second is Purpose,explained earlier as the stages of prime matter and form. The conjunction of these two give riseto the stage of predestination (qadar), which the Bb describes as the womb of the

possiblewhich existeth for the purpose of choice, for nothing can exist in any world except byits own choice and the condition for the choosing of good or evil (INBA vol. 40, pp. 140-141). Bahullh describes predestination as the stage of scheme and dimension, that is to say,the appearance of means in proper quantity (Midiy-i smn, vol. 8, p. 192), and Abdul-Bah clarifies that it consists of the necessary and indispensable relationships which exist

between the realities of things, such as the relationship between sun and soil, that the sun shouldshine and the soil yield (Selections from the Writings of Abdul-Bah, p. 198). The design ofthings and the necessary relationships governing their realities, however, are still hidden andundisclosed in this stage. Their manifestation in time and space is termed fate (qa ), whichis the fourth of the seven stages of coming-into-being. This would correspond to the actualconstruction of a bed, for instance. The fifth stage is termed either permission (idhn) or execution(im ), which Shaykh Ahmad calls the concomitant of fate. The sixth stage is called thefixed time, or the irrevocable decree (ajal), which refers to the natural duration of things, and the

seventh is called the book (kitb), which is the unveiling of the perfection of things. (See Amr vaKhalq, vol. 1, pp. 99-100 and Midiy-i-smn , vol. 8, pp. 191-192.)

After the creation of the elements (along with stars and planets), the elements became composedinto the forms that would give rise to organic existence, and by the mutual effect of thesecombinations on each other innumerable life forms arose. Abdul-Bah compares the planetearth to a living being. Like particular beings, it is itself a system composed of many sub-systems and governed by the same laws (Some Answered Questions, p. 182). Many life formsemerged simultaneously because life as a whole depends upon the unity and mutual dependenceof different forms of life: There is no doubt that this perfection which is in all beings wasrealized by the creation of God from the composition of the elements, by their appropriate

mingling and proportionate quantities, by the manner of their composition, and the influence ofother beings. For all beings are connected together like a chain; and reciprocal help, assistance

11


12/16

and interaction belonging to the properties of things are the causes of the existence, developmentand growth of created beings (Some Answered Questions, pp. 178-79).[7]

Biological evolution [cf. evolution], as a process of change influencing living organisms, isaccepted by the Bah teachings. Evolution in the broader sense of a force shaping othersystems, such as societies, is also used. In regard to physical evolution, Abdul-Bah states: Itis evident that this terrestrial globe, having once found existence, grew and developed in the

matrix of the universe, and came forth in different forms and conditions, until gradually itattained this present perfection, and became adorned with innumerable beings....[Likewise], man,in the beginning of his existence and in the womb of the earth, like the embryo in the womb ofthe mother, gradually grew and developed, and passed from one form to another, from one shapeto another, until he appeared with this beauty and perfection (Some Answered Questions, pp.182-83). Human societies have also evolved, according to Shoghi Effendi, by a process ofintegration which, starting with the family, the smallest unit in the scale of human organization,must, after having called successively into being the tribe, the city-state, and the nation, continueto operate until it culminates in the unification of the whole world (Promised Day is Come, p.122).

4. The Purpose of Creation

The Bah Writings compare the body of the world to the body of man. Every part of the humanbody is connected and coordinated with every other part by the unifying agency of the soul, sothat each part discharges its function in complete harmony and with perfect regularity (BahWorld Faith, p. 340). None of the parts is nonessential, but each plays a part in the functioning ofthe whole, otherwise creation would be imperfect. All existing being... have been created andorganized, composed, arranged and perfected as they ought to be; the universe has noimperfection (Some Answered Questions, p. 177). This perfection is not limited by time; italways exists, as the realities of things (i.e., the laws of nature) always exist and they alwaysrequire the existence of beings in which their qualities are manifested.

Humankind is the chief member of the body of the world, for he is in the position of the mind inthe human organism (Some Answered Questions, p. 178). As human maturity comes with thefull operation of the mental capacities, the maturity of the world will come when humankindreaches spiritual maturity. In all the universal cycles, explains Abdul-Bah, the divine andcreative purpose...was the evolution of spiritual man....The tree of life has ever borne the sameheavenly fruit (Promulgation, p. 220). The unfolding of creation, which begins through Godsoverflowing love, desires continually, out of reciprocal love, to complete its cycle and return toits origin. This love is the force that causes the elements to transition through ever higher formsof life until the human reality appears, a being capable of consciously recognizing and

worshiping its Creator, and finding God reflected, so to speak, in itself and all things.Bahullh states that mans capacity to know Him and to love Him...must needs be regardedas the generating impulse and the primary purpose underlying the whole of creation (Gleanings,

p. 65). The rest of creation, then, serves as the matrix for this process, and is a source foreducating and training the human spirit (Hidden Words, pp. 32-33). Man is the collective reality[of the universe]...the center where the glory of all the perfections of God shine forth--that is tosay, for each name, each attribute, each perfection which we affirm of God there exists a sign inman....If man did not exist, the universe would be without result, for the object of existence is theappearance of the perfections of God. Therefore, it cannot be said there was a time when manwas not. All that we can say is that this terrestrial globe at one time did not exist, and at its

beginning man did not appear upon it. But from the beginning which has no beginning, to the

end which has no end, a perfect manifestation [i.e., the perfect man] always exists (SomeAnswered Questions, p. 196). Stated in another way, If there were no man...the light of themind would not be resplendent in this world. This world would be like a body without a soul.

12


13/16

This world is also in the condition of a fruit tree, and man is like the fruit; without fruit the treewould be useless (Some Answered Questions, p. 201).

Although the generality of humankind is far from perfect, perfection is latent in each person, forin the creation of God there is no evil (Some Answered Questions, p. 214). Each being iscreated perfect in its own degree, and this is its innate character. The differences between

persons do not imply good or evil but...simply a difference of degree (Some Answered

Questions, p. 212). Abdul-Bah explains that certain qualities and natures innate in some menand apparently blameworthy are not so in reality. For example...greed, which is to ask forsomething more, is a praiseworthy quality provided that it is used suitably. So if a man is greedyto acquire science and knowledge, or to become compassionate, generous and just, it is most

praiseworthy. If he exercises his anger and wrath against the bloodthirsty tyrants...it is verypraiseworthy; but if he does not use these qualities in a right way, they are blameworthy (SomeAnswered Questions, p. 215). It is this acquired capacity of man to use the natural qualities in anunlawful way (contrary to his own inner ontological structure) that is the cause of theappearance of evil (Some Answered Questions, p. 214). Because human beings have free willand the susceptibility to follow their lower nature, which is symbolized as Satan, they are inneed of divine education and inspiration, in other words, the teachings and guidance of Gods

Prophets.

The Bah concept of Manifestations of God as intermediaries between God and man is anessential element of Bah cosmology. They are the divine Gardeners Who till the earth ofhuman hearts and minds, causing man to pass from degree to degree of progressiveunfoldment until perfection is attained (Promulgation, p. 295). Although such perfection isrelative, not absolute, it is referred to in the holy books as the second birth into the spiritual lifeof the Kingdom and eternal life (Some Answered Questions, pp. 223-224, 242). In this stationman comes to know God insofar as he comes to know and abide by the spiritual perfectionslatent in his own reality (Gleanings, pp. 326-327). The coming of one of these Manifestations ofGod renews the world spiritually and is referred to in the Bah scriptures as a new creation(Kitb-i-qn, p. 115).

Bibliography

Abdul-Bah. Midiy-i smn (The Heavenly Bread). Comp. Abdul-Hamd Ishrq Khvar.

New Delhi: Bah Publishing Trust, 1984. (Reprint of vols. 2, 5, and 9 formerly published inTehran.)

-----. Khi bt (Talks of Abdul-Bah). Hofheim-Langenhain: Bah-Verlag, 1984. (Reprint of

3volumes: Vol. 1 Egypt 1921; Vol. 2 Egypt 1942; Vol. 3 Tehran 1970.

-----. Maktb-i 'Abdu'l-Bah (Collected Letters). Volumes 1-3. Cairo 1910, 1911 and 1921.

-----. Mufva t (Table Talks). New Delhi: Bah' Publishing Trust, 1984. (Reprint of the 1920

Cairo edition.)

-----. Muntakhabt (Selections). Vol. 3. Langenhain: Bah Verlag, 1992.

-----. The Promulgation of Universal Peace. Talks Delivered by 'Abdu'l-Bah during His Visit to

13


14/16

the United States and Canada in 1912. Comp. Howard MacNutt. Wilmette: Bah PublishingTrust, 1982.

-----. Selections from the Writings of Abdul-Bah. Haifa: Bah World Centre, 1978.

-----. Some Answered Questions. Trans. Laura Clifford Barney. Wilmette: Bah PublishingTrust,

1981.

Afnn, Mu ammad. Tafsr-i-Bismillh ar-Ra mn ar-Ra m. hang-i-Bad, vol. 24, no. 5-6(126 B.E.) pp. 121-126.

Aristotle. A New Aristotle Reader. Ed. J. L. Ackrill. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987.

Amr va Khalq (Command and Creation). Vol. 1-2. Comp. F il-i-Mzindarn. Tehran: Bah

Publishing Trust, 1954-55. (Reprinted Bah Verlag 1985.)

Bahi World Faith: Selected Writings of Bahullh and Abdul-Bah. Wilmette: Bah

Publishing Trust, 1971.

Bahullh. thr-i-Qalam Al (Traces from the Supreme Pen). Vol. 7. Tehran: BahPublishing

Trust, 134 B.E.

-----. Gleanings from the Writings of Bahullh. Wilmette: Bah Publishing Trust, 1952.

-----. The Hidden Words. London: Bah Publishing Trust, 1932.

-----. Kitb-i-qn: The Book of Certitude. Wilmette: Bah Publishing Trust, 1950.

-----. Tablets of Bahullh revealed after the Kitb-i-Aqdas. Haifa: Bah World Centre, 1982.

Gilson, Etienne. History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages. New York: RandomHouse,

1955.Goodall, Helen S. and Ella G. Cooper. Daily Lessons Received in Akk January 1908.Wilmette:

Bah Publishing Trust, 1979.

Goodman, Lenn. Jewish and Islamic Philosophy. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press,1999.

Hamid, Idris Samawi. The Metaphysics and Cosmology of Process According to Shaykh

A mad

14


15/16

al-A s: Critical Edition, Translation, and Analysis of Observations in Wisdom. Dissertation:State University of New York at Buffalo, 1998.

Haraw, Mu ammad-Sharf. Anwriyya: An 11th century A.H. Persian translation andcommentary

on Suhrawards ikmat al-Ishrq. Ed. Hossein Ziai. Tehran: Amir Kabir, 1980.

INBA (Iranian National Bah Archives). Bound facsimiles of unpublished texts from the Bb,

Bahullh, and Abdul-Bah.

Marmura, Michael. The Conflict of the Worlds Pre-eternity in the Tahfuts of Al-Ghazl andIbn

Rushd. Dissertation: University of Michigan, 1959.

Medieval Political Philosophy. Eds. Ralph Lerner and Muhsin Mahdi. Ithaca: Cornell University

Press, 1972.

Plato. The Collected Dialogues. Ed. Edith Hamilton and H. Cairns. Princeton: PrincetonUniversity

Press, 1961.

Reale, Giovanni. A History of Ancient Philosophy. II. Plato and Aristotle. Albany: StateUniversity

of New York Press, 1990.

Sajd, Jafar. Farhang-i-I il t va Tabrt-i-Irfn (Encyclopedia of Mystical Terminologyand

Explanations). 4th ed. Tehran 1378 A.H.

Shaykh A mad A s. Shar al-Mashir. Tabriz 1278 A.H.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Provisional revised translation.




[5] Normally, I would not mix science and philosophy, but it is interesting that a new theorycalled the holographic principle holds that the universe is like a hologram: just as a trick of light

allows a fully three-dimensional image to be recorded on a flat piece of film, our seeminglythree-dimensional universe could be completely equivalent to alternative quantum fields and

15


16/16

16

physical laws painted on a distant, vast surface (Information in the Holographic Universe,Scientific American (August 2003), p. 60).



Creation - Keven Brown 2003

Documents

Transcript of Creation - Keven Brown 2003