Paragraph 122

As the commentators of the Qur’án and they that follow the letter thereof misapprehended the inner meaning of the words of God and failed to grasp their essential purpose, they sought to demonstrate that, according to the rules of grammar, whenever the term “idhá” (meaning “if” or “when”) precedeth the past tense, it invariably hath reference to the future. Later, they were sore perplexed in attempting to explain those verses of the Book wherein that term did not actually occur. Even as He hath revealed: “And there was a blast on the trumpet,—lo! it is the threatened Day! And every soul is summoned to a reckoning,—with him an impeller and a witness.” In explaining this and similar verses, they have in some cases argued that the term “idhá” is implied. In other instances, they have idly contended that whereas the Day of Judgment is inevitable, it hath therefore been referred to as an event not of the future but of the past. How vain their sophistry! How grievous their blindness! They refuse to recognize the trumpet-blast which so explicitly in this text was sounded through the revelation of Muḥammad. They deprive themselves of the regenerating Spirit of God that breathed into it, and foolishly expect to hear the trumpet-sound of the Seraph of God who is but one of His servants! Hath not the Seraph himself, the angel of the Judgment Day, and his like been ordained by Muḥammad’s own utterance? Say: What! Will ye give that which is for your good in exchange for that which is evil? Wretched is that which ye have falsely exchanged! Surely ye are a people, evil, in grievous loss.


Wow. This paragraph kind of stumped us. We read it, and re-read it, and then re-re-read it, and still had a difficult time figuring out what to talk about. We found it difficult to understand, awkward to follow, and had a hard time getting pretty much any sort of a grasp on it.

And so, what did we do? We went back to the beginning. Oh, but not the beginning of this book, but rather to Ruhi Book 1.

What, we asked ourselves, is the overarching theme of this entire paragraph?

Before we answer that, though, we want to just mention something that we haven't actually said before about the entire book. It seems that Part 1 is dedicated not to answering the questions of the uncle of the Bab, but rather to reframing the questions themselves. It is as if Baha'u'llah is telling him that the very questions he is asking are the wrong sort of questions. They are framed in the understanding current amongst the theologians of the day, and are therefore based on an incorrect premise. It is as if the uncle is asking, "When did the stars fall from heaven? When did the sun cease to shine?" Baha'u'llah is sitting here saying that these are the wrong questions. What we should be asking is "How did the stars fall? How did the sun cease to shine?" Rather than asking if these things occurred, based on our faulty understanding of what we expect to happen, we should be asking the Messenger of God how these things occurred.

Well, that brings us to Part 2.

Now that we have a better understanding of what to ask, Baha'u'llah is now re-framing the questions that are specific to the uncle's request.

Part 1 concerned us deeply because it helped us understand a historical perspective, no matter what our starting point.

Part 2 is specifically concerned with issues relating to Islam. And this, truth be told, is beyond us.

But now, with that clearly stated, we can go back to this paragraph and ask ourselves what Baha'u'llah, in short, is talking about.

He seems to be addressing an issue around the singular term, idhá, and showing how the theologians have twisted and turned to try to explain things in ways that they can understand. You see, they are of the belief that the questions regarding the Judgment Day all relate to the distant future. And so, when the text of the Qur'an talks about it in the present tense, they are at a loss. They come up with the explanation that the future tense is somehow implied, even though the text clearly phrases it in the present tense. "It is the threatened Day." "Every soul is summoned to a reckoning." Yes, it refers to the future, but it also relates to the present day, both at the same time.

And it is interesting to note that Baha'u'llah is not condemning them for mis-leading the people deliberately. He is not accusing them of malicious intent. Instead He laments their vain sophistry. He says that their argument is superficially sound, and may make some sort of sense on the surface, but doesn't really hold up to scrutiny. He accuses them of blindness, not wickedness.

There is an element of sadness in this paragraph for us, for the scholars have deprived themselves of this regenerating spirit by clinging to their preconceived ideas. They had an idea, that the Day of Judgment was in the distant future, and then tried to force the text to support this theory. Instead, what they should have done is been detached from their idea and examined the text to see if it supported their theory. After all, "No man shall attain the shores of the ocean of true understanding except he be detached from all that is in heaven and on earth."

When studying the text, and trying to understand it, it is important to recognize the need for detachment and humility. After all, let's put this in perspective. Someone was reading these passages in the Qur'an, and thought that these references, perhaps, spoke of some future time. Sure. That sounds reasonable. Then what they should have done is looked at the text again to see if their idea was supported by the text. Instead what they did was insist that their theory was right, and it became a recognized tradition. Now, it has the weight of doctrine. And it is because of this that a great many people have been led astray.

Time and again, those very basic concepts that Baha'u'llah introduced at the beginning of book prove to be the exact tools we need to understand everything that follows.